NRA: Civil Rights organization or Dangerous rightwing organization?

[billbuckhead]

Subject: NRA: Civil rights organization or Dangerous rightwing organization?
Message:
(A) Civil rights organization
"Because you choose to own guns- affirmed by no less than the Bill of Rights - you embrace a view at odds with the cultural war lords. If that is the outcome of cultural war, and you are the victims, I can only ask the obvious question. What will become of the right itself? Or other rights not deemed acceptable by the thought police? What other truth in your heart will you disavow with your hand?

Rank-and-file Americans wake up every morning, increasingly bewildered and confused at why their views make them lesser citizens. The message gets through; Heaven help the God fearing, law-abiding, Caucasian, middle-class Protestant-or even worse, evangelical Christian, Midwestern or Southern- or even worse, rural, apparently straight-or even worse, admitted heterosexuals, gun-owing-or even worse, NRA-card-carrying, average working stiff-or even worse, male working stiff-because, not only don't you count, you are a down-right obstacle to social progress. Your voice deserves a lower decibel level, your opinion is less enlightened, your media access is insignificant, and frankly, mister, you need to wake up, wise up, and learn a little something from your new-America and until you do, would you mind shutting up?"

Charlton Heston
President of the National Rifle Association


(B)

This infamous Grover Norqist quote is one of many reasons why I think the NRA is a dangerous rightwing organization.

“My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub."

[DoNotRefill]

1. Given how they've branched out.....

into other issues (like the First Amendment) in conjunction with groups like the ACLU, I'd have to say they're moving into the Civil Rights group category.

[cheezus]

2. B) from old poll: Terrorist enabler

I'm not sure how the moderator got "inflamatory" out of that. Probably a closet gun nut.

[billbuckhead]

3. Democrats need to call Republicans soft on terror if AWB is not renewed.

Not strengthening the AWB and other gun laws is being weak on terrorism. I doubt they spend much on enforcement either. The Al Queda say in their handbook to take advantage of how easy it is to buy guns in America.

[FeebMaster]

4. If Bush renews the AWB

are all of the gun grabbers going to vote for him?

[NoKillShelterGuy]

7. Be careful doing that.

After all, some anti-gunners have said "assault weapons" are WMDs. We found tons of "assault weapons" in Iraq.

[Wonk]

10. ROTFLMAO, is that the latest RW talking point? Hadn't heard that one yet.

[NoKillShelterGuy]

17. I didn't make it up....

no joke, I saw a woman from one of the anti-gun groups on a news show calling them "WMDs" I thought it was pretty funny, personally, especially since I've seen a couple of other anti-gunners say the same thing since then.

Is an anti-gun talking point a "RW talking point"? Well, I guess it would depend, since most of the gun control laws implemented federally were done so by Republican presidents.

[SmokingJacket]

5. I think 1/3 idealism, 2/3 penis complex n/t

[Cheswick2.0]

50. LOL

yup.... but I also think they are dangerous right wing nut cases.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with gun control and their opposition is based on the profit motive.

[sendero]

6. What amazes me...

... is how dumb some people can be. The AWB is nothing but bullsh*t on a platter that makes certain people think they have accomplished something.

The fact is, it is full of loopholes, and guns are relatively simple mechanical devices that can and are easily modified should someone wish to get around this "ban". Sure, if you get caught with an illegal gun you will be in a spot of trouble, but it is minor compared to the trouble you'll be in if you kill people. People who have such things in mind don't care about your stupid little "ban".

People should just grow up. You cannot control everything in your environment. Stupid restrictive gun laws are as effective as drug laws, which is to say basically ineffective.

Make yourself feel happy, call your senator and demand that stupid laws like the AWB be retained. And while you are at it, let our Rep rivals know you are doing it. They love using your stupidity as a wedge issue, it has worked VERY WELL for them thank you.

Is that inflammatory enough?

[billbuckhead]

9. Gee, Japan has restrictive gun laws and 10 times less homocide

I wonder if it is because their gun homocide rate is 180 times lower?
<http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html>

[sendero]

13. The culture of Japan..

.... is 1000000% different than the culture of the USA. As soon as you find a

1) politically workable and
2) practically workable

way to get 100,000,000 guns in an incinerator, attempts to compare the two countries is an exercise in futility.

The fact is, as I have stated - if someone wants an "assault weapon", it is no big deal to get one. Pass laws until you are blue, you will not change that fact. Pot is illegal but trust me, you can get it anywhere.

When "assault weapons" are outlawed only outlaws will have them and that is a simple fact.

Pragmatically, the gun issue is a deal killer for Dems. Why waste the political capital? You are not going to make any difference other than losing millions of votes from people who understand the simple truth about gun laws.

[billbuckhead]

22. I guess Ireland's culture is also entirely alien to America's

It's numbers of murders vs guns vs guns and murders are similare to Japan's. I gues Aericans just aren't as good as those Europeans, Malaysians, Australians, Kiwis, etc.
<http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html >

[sendero]

56. Let's say...

.. I accept your basic premise (I don't for a second, but let's pretend).

Ok, we are where we are. America is STEEPED in guns. They are everywhere. Now, tell me how easily circumvented laws that are ignored by the real bad guys (like the AWB for instance) are going to help AT ALL. This I have to hear.

While you are thinking up an answer, let me mention that these laws COST US VOTES and deliver NOTHING IN RETURN. They simply add to the police-state atmosphere and keep law abiding citizens from having the same access to weapons that crooks have.

For the record, I am not against all gun control. I think background checks and waiting periods might actually do something, they might prevent someone getting a gun easily in a fit of anger. And, they are not intrusive beyond their utility. In the not too distant past, I was pro-gun control. A woman I was married to was once shot. The shooter got a slap on the wrist although she almost died, because our justice system is corrupt and juries are easily swayed, but that is another thread. Short of literally confiscating all guns, nothing would have prevented this loser from getting his weapon. For that matter, given the close-up nature of the crime, it would have probably happened even if he didn't have a gun.

Nobody likes living in the wild west where all these guns are around. Especially, when I hear about some kid who got a hold of dad's handgun with tragic results, it just makes me sick. But again, there are laws against leaving a gun accessible to children but that doesn't stop idiots from doing it. The AWB isn't stopping anyone who really wants an "assault" weapon from having one, it is just stopping lots of people from voting Dem.

[nose pin]

23. Japanese culture

is much more tolerant of government surveillance, investigation, and control than what would fly in the US. They have had their own "Patriot Act" (times ten) for over a thousand years.

[Columbia]

14. Gee, they have far less OVERALL homicide too

I guess if you were objective about it, you could see that it has a lot more to do with culture and other demographics (poverty, unemployment, etc.) than anything else.

Or... just blame the guns!

Btw, is it 10 times or 180 times lower? Make up your mind, MrB!

[billbuckhead]

18. Check it out for yourself

It has a link with a progun website. While you're there check out the other countries with low gun ownership and their low homocide rates. Check out the other industrialized countries with high gun ownership and their high homocide rates.
<http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html >

[Columbia]

25. I asked you a question

Which is it?

[billbuckhead]

28. See for yourself, I posted the link three times

10 times less homocide and 180 times less gun homocide. It's at Guncite.

[Columbia]

31. ?

Are you for real or is that just a Freudian slip?

[billbuckhead]

39. This is the rudeness I'm talking about

I try to be nice.

[Columbia]

41. Do you know what "homocide" means?

n/t

[billbuckhead]

58. I'm putting you on ignore

[DoNotRefill]

63. Ummm....Bill....the term "homocide"...

is WIDELY considered to be a slur against gays. It's pronounced "HO-MO-side".

If you're talking about people intentionally killing people without insinuating that it was a homosexual lover's dispute, the term is "homicide". It's pronounced "ho-mi-SIDE

A single letter can make a TREMENDOUS difference. You're familiar with the country of Niger, right? If you misspell it by adding another "g" in the middle, you end up with a particularly nasty racial epithet.

Now if somebody was talking about goint to Africa on a safari, and when asked where in Africa they were going, responded by saying "I'm going to (N-word)", giving them the benefit of the doubt, I'd assume that they were just ignorant as hell, and immediately correct their pronunciation, having them just include one "g". If, after I said that, they continued using (n-word) improperly, after they'd been TOLD of their error, I'd have to assume that they were just a typical racist asshole, since they now knew better.

I don't think you're being DELIBERATELY anti-gay, but you've been informed of the difference, and the nature of your misspelling. I'ts "homicide", NOT "homocide". Get it?????

[T Town Jake]

37. Gee, bill...

...Switzerland's a pretty placid place for a country that requires it's citizens to keep a firearm in their homes (excepting criminals and the insane, of course). What's up with them?

[billbuckhead]

42. Swiss have very strict laws and are surrounded by other nations with even

stricter laws, Switzerland is an unusual case anyhow, what about 30 other nations. You're strectching by using Swizerland but that's what most of RBKA extemists gun memes are. Japan, Ireland, Germany, etc can't be used as a model, but Switzerland alone can be.

[T Town Jake]

47. Gee, bill, no substantive reply...

...can't say I'm really all that surprised, but it's the old "triumph of hope over experience" thing...

[formernaderite]

26. Well said......

...I'm tired of all the anti-gun logic that runs rampant here...

[Liberal Classic]

8. Excluded middles a-poppin'

I think the real answer is neither.

[libhill]

11. I think that -

gun ownership needs to be tempered with some common fukkin` sense. I own several shotguns, which I use for dove and quail hunting in season. I used to own a rifle or two, and I`ve done some deer hunting. However, I am all in favor of a ban on assault weapons. Sport is one thing, but you don`t need a damned AK-47 to kill a deer.

[vote independent]

12. Never even Shot a gun

I hate guns. Absolutely hate them. Never wanted to fire one off.

However, I think everyone has the right to own guns.

You know who banned guns?

Hitler...Stalin...Mao

Oppresive regimes can take over when the citizens don't have the ability to revolt. For that very reason, I think there should be no bans on guns. If you ban one type of gun, what keeps you from banning all guns.

[billbuckhead]

19. You're not being fair to socialism

Sweden hasn't produced a Mao or Stalin or even a Chimp.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Djinn]

55. Yep and that FAAAAR left socialist

John Howard LOL - to be fair he didn't outright ban them but did ban private ownership of all semi-automatic rifles, semi-automatic shotguns and pump-action shotguns.

He's the most right wing PM Australia has had since Pig Iron Bob

[DoNotRefill]

15. what's wrong with using an AK to kill deer?

as long as you've got a 5 round magazine in it, it's generally legal to do so. And the round the AK fires is ballistically comparable to the .30-30.

[Liberal Classic]

16. The security of a free state

Does not need defending from hordes of deer.

[libhill]

20. True, but -

Frankly, I haven't seen any hordes of Iraqis, Grenadians, Panamanians, or even "A-rabs" marching through my town lately. All the usual suspect booger men that the wingnuts and Repukes expect us to be afraid of. And, unfortunately, many assault weapons end up in the hands of gang members.

[TexasMexican]

27. The classic you dont need an AK-47 to kill a deer argument...

Most "AK-47" owners dont actually own AK-47s, they own semi-automatic clones.

As such what difference does it make if the semi-auto rifle they use to hunt deer looks like an AK-47, or if they are just using a Mini-30 rifle which fires the same 7.62x39 rnd.

One looks like an assault rifle the other looks like a hunting rifle, both fire the same round? Whats difference does it make?

[libhill]

29. That was more

a rhetorical statement than an argument. My point is that a hell of a lot of assault weapons end up in the wrong hands, thus my support for an assault weapon ban.

[TexasMexican]

30. Should we ban rilfes?

Many "assault weapons" are just rifles with certain features.

I dont think they end in the wrong hands anymore than any other firearms, however I guess if your average criminal had a choose in weapons they would choose something that looks like an "assault weapon," regardless of actual capability.

If AR-15, and AK clones were not available do you think criminals would stop using firearms, or do you think perhaps they would just switch over to using whatever rifles are available?

[libhill]

32. No doubt that

they would try, but I would hope that an ordinary garden variety rifle would be harder for them to come by, most of their "weapons of choice " are acquired thru black market operations.

[TexasMexican]

33. please explain

Why would a "regular" rifle be harder to obtain than an "assault weapon."

Assault weapons dont just appear in the black market.

To get an assault weapon to the black market would entail the same procedure that it would to get a regular rifle on the black market.

[libhill]

35. Well, let`s put it this way

you can go to a Walmart anywhere, buy a 30.06 ,30.30, shotgun, etc. Haven`t seen too many AK`s or Uzi`s in there lately. And you or I could buy the items and walk out after a brief background check by phone. You`re average Al Queda operative or "the Government is bringing the U.N. troops to kill me, I ain`t paying no taxes" wing nut is looking for more fire power, and he`s not going to get it at Wally World. Or anywhere where the usual restrictions are in place. And I assure you, they're not interested in hunting deer on your lease property.

[TexasMexican]

38. That still doesnt explain it.

There are "hunting rifles" with the same capabilities as "assault weapons."

I suggested that if "assault weapons" were no longer available that criminals would just switch to "hunting rifles" that filled the same role.

Example, an AK-47 clone fires a 7.62x39mm round, a mini-30 (its a hunting rifle) fires the exact same round, both of these rifles have detachable magazines. So why wouldnt criminals use the hunting rifle if the assault weapon wasnt available?

You claimed that they wouldnt because the hunting rifles wouldnt be available on the black market?

My question to you is how do you think the black market operates?

How do you think those assault weapons ended up on the black market?

Why do you think that hunting rifles wouldnt end up on the black market if there was a demand?

Do you think there wouldnt be a demand on the black market for "hunting rifles" if "assault weapons" just disappeared?

[libhill]

40. I would think that

hunting rifles, revolvers, etc. would be some what easier to control under the systems already in place- see post # 33, for an example (not my post).

[libhill]

43. Correction, make that post 34.

[JayS]

59. What about post 34? I'm not sure what you mean. n/t

n/t

[DoNotRefill]

64. Tx.lib....

You can't buy pot, coke, or meth at Wally World. How hard is it to get?

If there's a demand but no legal supply, the black market will step in and supply it.

[Romulus]

60. gee, great

you do know that your Remington 1100, 870, 1187, & SP-10 are all considered by the pro-AWb crowd to be "semi-automatic assault weapons" that "spray fire as fast as you can pull the trigger," right? Banned in Australia and the UK (along with all pump-action and lever-action firearms), which are the model countries for the pro-AWB crowd? You did know that, right?

I own several shotguns, which I use for dove and quail hunting in season . . . However, I am all in favor of a ban on assault weapons."

[Taverner]

21. They used to be a lot better

When they were for gun rights, period. More like the Sierra Club was to conservation, they were to hunting.

Then they wen't psycho...I still consider them a civil rights organization, but they need to tone down the hateful rhetoric.

[JayS]

34. What do you think of this brand of gun control?

Project Targets Gun Criminals
June 4, 2004
Reported by KPLC Staff
http://www.kplctv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1919376&nav=0nqxNfmq


You may wonder why police seem to seize so many guns-- well, getting guns used for crime off the streets has been a high priority of Lake Charles Police Chief Don Dixon since he became chief in January 2002. The special emphasis seems to have reduced local crime involving firearms.

*SNIP*

Chief Dixon says it's an initiative targeting federal prosecution of gun criminals: "If you're a convicted felon and we catch you in possession of a gun, there is no good excuse. There is no good reason. You're up to bad intent. These are the people out there who are repeat offenders, habitual offenders, and that's basically how they survive-- by committing crimes with guns. You take just one of them off the street it's going to help."

So, Dixon explains, whenever they find a gun they run a trace on it through the federal ATF . If possible, they pursue federal prosecution which Dixon says has great results: "It speeds the system up. These cases, normally, by the time the incident happens, we send it over. It usually goes before a grand jury within three or four months, we have an indictment, 95% of the time they're detained in the federal system which means they're a danger to the community-- there is no bond."

But even better perhaps, Dixon says there's been a tremendous reduction in the number of guns on the streets and in crimes involving guns: "Our reduction in gun crimes from 2003 compared to 2002--which is armed robberies with a firearm, aggravated assault with a firearm, I think is about a 30 per cent reduction."

*SNIP*





Cops to crack down on gun violations
Thursday, June 03, 2004
Cops to crack down on gun violations
By WILLIAM F. AST III / H-P Staff Writer
http://www.heraldpalladium.com/articles/2004/06/03/news/news3.txt


CASSOPOLIS -- Southwest Michigan law enforcement officials on Wednesday announced a new program that Dowagiac Police Chief Thomas Atkinson said will "send away the bad guys for a long, long time."

"The goal is to move them out of the community and away from this area," Van Buren County Sheriff Dale Gribler said. Project Safe Neighborhoods-Southwest will provide Berrien, Cass and Van Buren counties with a "gun detective" who will work full time on cases involving convicted felons with guns, according to Margaret Chiara, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Michigan.

That detective, working with federal agencies, will send appropriate cases to the "federal system because our penalties are so much more substantial for this particular crime rather than the state system, where they are minimal," Chiara said. The detective's job will be mostly paid for by the federal government.

Felons found to be in possession of a firearm face two years in prison under Michigan law, Gribler said. The average sentence in federal court is 69 months, he said.

*SNIP*

[DrWeird]

36. Well, they elected a racist president.

nt

[durutti]

44. A fundraising mechanism for the GOP.

Nothing more, nothing less.

[JayS]

45. Nah, you're thinking of the Brady Bunch. :) n/t

n/t

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

46. Just for the record:

Look at how Heston utilizes victimage rhetoric. It seems that there is power in claiming to be victim.

1) These people are hypocritical beyond belief; the avoidance of creating more victims is the foundation of political correctness, which they abhor.

2) We here at DU decry their use of victimage rhetoric. I guess it's our language only.

3) Can we please just kick the shit out of them based on logic, rationality, and statistics?

Christ, we claim they are mentally handicapped (I refrain from calling them "retarded" out of respect for some of my fellow Duers' sesibilities), yet they are winning this debate. If they're just this side of "idiot" on the IQ test, what in God's name does that make us?????

Slowly yours,
G.U.

[JayS]

48. Call them what you will, but they know how to get all their ducks...

...in a row before they start shooting. Our side suffers from some high profile Democrats that think they can just lie to get their anti-gun message out. These messages are so poorly thought out that it is incredibly easy to debunk them. As this debunking is done in public, it makes us look stupid, alarmist, misinformed, etc. Who would trust someone like this on any issue?

We need to adopt a better brand of gun control if we want to be taken seriously, and there are many brands out there that actually work.

[Hammie]

49. After perusing the June issue of American Rifleman

I have to admit, the NRA does not confine itself to strictly 2nd amendment issues and gun porn. Although to be fair that is 90% of what is in there. They do branch out into other areas like hunter's rights, and ahem "minority issues" (in this case, guns for left handers).

And speaking of gun porn, the centerfold this month is the Springfield XD .45 GAP! w00t. The curves on that baby, wow. And is that a light mounted up there? Excuse me just a minute...I'm back. Man, nice cartridges too.

[tom_paine]

51. It once was A but now is (B)

I am sorry to see it. We need a legitimate progun lobby, but the NRA no longer fts the bills.

The NRA is to gun owners as the AARP is to old folks.

Betrayers.

[notbush]

52. Beating up on the NRA is one of the

dumbest things our party has done in recent years.
Most pollsters say it cost us congress in 1996 (haven't got it back yet...even though Newt is LONG GONE).

[NuttyFluffers]

53. they have been overwhelmed by pretty loopy people.

they fight tooth and nail politically against anything pertaining to firearms. they've historically have become more reactionary as time has passed and have essentially become loopy. a very bad organization to represent the gun community. there's a lot of really responsible gun owners and collectors out there, but i honestly doubt that they would feel at all comfortable in the modern state of the NRA. the NRA would like to equate their existance to the very existance of all firearms, but i believe they are a poor representative for all gun owners. liberal gun owners need to call a spade a spade and disassociate from reactionary organizations like this. the sane don't help their argument aligning with the insane.

[JohnLocke]

54. Somewhere in between?

[billbuckhead]

57. It's up to 2/3 now that the NRA are bad guys

I wonder how the poll would have done, if the terrorist enabler part had stood. I think just the same. Sorry, RBKA extemists and terrorism enablers.

[Romulus]

61. in between

I don't get the "dangerous" label. :shrug:

The NRA continually loses me whenever I get around to thinking I may be able to support them.

The first time was whehn Loopy LaPierre, during a 2002 speech to a "national conference on conservatism" :eyes: called for racial profiling of middle-eastern-looking males. The most recent "loss" on their part was when they rolled out that stupid "ClintonGunBan.com" website, trying to blame Bill Clinton for the 1994 AWB.

Since the NRA sux, I only support state-level pro-firearms-owner groups.

[blindpig]

62. inadequate choices

how about shameless front for the firearms industry. I come down in the middle on this one.