NRA "Poll"

[matt819]

I just got a push poll call from the NRA. Played a clip from the NRA president telling me we are on the wrong track and that NRA's 4 million gun owners might have something to say about that. Hmmm. Sounds very much like those 2nd amendment remedies we've heard so much about. In any event, after listening to this clip I was asked if I trusted President Obama to protect Americans' rights to own guns. I said yes, and they hung up. This is not a poll. My guess is that it's a fund raiser.

What crap.

Far be it from me, a gun non-owner, to tell the NRA its business. But if it was at all interested in credibility among the 300 millions Americans who are not members of the NRA, the NRA would support gun registration (we register our cars, don't we?), make it difficult for crazy people to purchase guns, and make just ever so slightly difficult for people on the terrorist watch list and no-fly list to purchase guns.

Really, gun owners, there's no need to respond, or flame me. I just wanted to vent.

[rfranklin]

1. I am a gun owner and I find the NRA extremely annoying...

with their hysteria and right wing mindset.

[doc03]

14. +1

[Historic NY]

53. +2 gave up on them 30 years ago.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

2. Registration, logistically, is a nightmare.

Read up on the failure of the canadian gun registry... Way overbudget, many people have still failed to register after several amnesties, and it has helped solve very little crime. And then relize that America's gun registry would have to serve nearly 300,000,000 friearms. Even with 90% participation (entirely unrealistic) you'd still have tens of millions of black market firearms. Not to mention prohbited criminals with illegal firearms are not required by law to register them.

And these are just logistical problems... it has nothing to do with the NRA or public support. Add to the fact that registration is historically associated with bans, and you're going to lose ALOT of political capital.

[rhett o rick]

5. We seem to be able to register cars.

"registration is historically associated with bans" Plez provide more info. Pets are registered, cars are registered, computers are registered, and on and on. What bans are you referring to?

[MrModerate]

8. Your computer is registered? Do you mean recording your IP address . . .

Because that's something else altogether.

[rhett o rick]

17. The point was that we register lots of things. Why not guns? nm

[petronius]

29. Why should we register guns? What benefits would be provided, or problems

solved? :shrug:

Why do we register cars? Do the same reasons apply to guns?

[Katya Mullethov]

73. Revenue

no

[sylveste]

76. i have tons of other tools

none of which are registered. if you're going to register guns you might as well register garden rakes, roofing hatchetts and cordless drills.

[LawnKorn]

11. Cars are registered to operate on public thoroughfares, not for ownership

[rhett o rick]

16. Soooo. If we can register cars, we can register guns. nm

[LawnKorn]

18. I own a car that is not registered.

I can drive it on privite property and the Government has no say in the matter.

I also own a gun that is not regestered, and never will be.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Not Me]

25. Do you have a title for the car?

Then it's 'registered.'

[RSillsbee]

26. I also own a gun that is not registered, and never will be.

You say that like it's outside the norm. Registration of firearms is illegal under current Federal law.

None of my weapons are registered and most of them were purchased second hand in private sales so they're not even tied to me by a 4473.

[Major Hogwash]

19. Oh, shit!

I have an unregistered kitty kat!!!!
An it's fully loaded, with 10 claws and umpteen teeth that are razor sharp.

And sometimes, not very often, but sometimes, that kitty kat will reach around when I am petting it, and she will put her mouth on my hand, but not bite.
She will just hold my hand there, in "bite mode", and freeze my hand right there.
What's up with that?

[beevul]

41. As has been said...

"registration is historically associated with bans" Plez provide more info. Pets are registered, cars are registered, computers are registered"

Pet registration - Not required in most places in America.

Car registration is required ONLY when a car is used in public. Race cars that are trailered for example, do not require it but in a tiny handful of places.

Computer registration?

Where, please, and is it representative of the nation as a whole?

"and on and on."

What things, which are repreentative of the nation as a whole, are REQUIRED to be registered simply to have at ones own home?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

67. here is a recent example:

In califirnia, registration was required for SKS Sporter Rifles. A some point the CA government decided to ban them and then sent out notices to all registrants that the rifles are to be voluntarily turned in by Jan 1 2000 or the will be sought out and seized (and face criminal charges. It has happened in CA and it has happened numerous times in other countries - the most well known is probably englands bans/confiscations. Google it... TONS of info about registration leading to confiscations.

Ask yourself, what good will registration do? As a whole, many criminals are repeat offenders and, by definition, tend not to be law abiding. Why on earth would they register guns in their posession? In fact, in Canada the non compliance rate is around 60%... 60% of regular owners DONT register thier firearms. Such a rate in America would amount to over 180 million unaccounted for firearms wich would easily undermine any and all benefit from registration. Which means you get all of the negative press, budget problems, and political fallout associated with registration... and none of the positive effects.

Gun registration has been shown to be expensive and ineffective.
It's not worth supporting if it will cost political seats.

A car is not a firearm. It's not something that you can hide under a coat. Cars are 3000 pound masses of steel, glass, and plastics which account for vastly more deaths per year than guns. Nor do they need registered/licensed for private use. Not to mention the possesion of cars, unlike guns, is not a constutionally enumerated right. If people had evidence to believe registration of cars would lead to confiscation... registering cars would be equally unpopular.

[S_B_Jackson]

77. Only if those cars are to be driven on public roads.

And in most states, firearms are treated similarly. If you want to carry them in public a Concealed Carry permit is required.

And seriously, you actually register your dog? Why is that any of the city's business???

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. You evidently gave an incorrect answer.

They'll try the next suc...person on the list.

[onehandle]

4. The NRA is just another anti-Obama, Conservative front.

Nothing more.

[aikoaiko]

7. Howvery clever for anti-Obama forces to form this front in 1871 for the purpose you describe.

geesh.

[MrModerate]

12. Puh-leeze. Organizations evolve over time. When I was a kid . . .

My dad and I were NRA members because the organization focused on hunter safety. Since that time it's evolved into a hysterical cult and a public bully.

Not exactly a historical anomaly. The Republican party was once pro-freedom.

[aikoaiko]

21. Of course, but I was being as ridiculous as the poster to whom I responded.

President Obama has not been pushing his campaign promises to increase gun control, but he has a history of not being a supporter of the right to keep and bear arms (especially compared to other political opponents). So naturally, its been easy for the NRA to endorse other people.

But the NRA is not a front for anti-Obama forces as the hyperbolic among us would suggest.

[flamin lib]

30. Not according to the DVD that Cheaper than Dirt has on auto-replay

in their store. I refuse to go in that place after hearing Wayne LaPierre rant while shopping.

[aikoaiko]

31. Wayne Lapierre said the NRa was an anti-Obama conservative front?

:shrug:

[flamin lib]

34. He just ranted against Obama for 90 minutes. Don;'t know how you'd

define anti-Obama but that's close enoufh foe me . . .

[aikoaiko]

38. I'm sure it was the usual hyperbolic distortion based on kernels of truth

but there is much to not like about our President has said and done about firearms, historically.

I'm against the things my President has supported in the context of gun control. But I am not against my President.

[MrModerate]

35. I don't think they're a front for anything. I think their views are very personal . . .

and sincere (and consistent), although (IMO) deranged.

[AzNick]

47. But I am a member nonetheless and make my voice heard

Note that most guns & shooters forums are a-political.

Once in a while you see some freeper try to start something and it's usually a dud. Once in a while an idiot has teabagger crap in his signature / avatar. But mostly it's apolitical. Once in a while a gunsmith has an anti-Obama poster, but usually it's in a white trash part of town, like Apache Junction. Or one has Fox News in the corner. But mostly gun owners don't come up with political crap and it's all about the hobby (shooting guns).

The NRA was basically hijacked by the right and it's our responsibility, liberal gun owners, to make it clear that 1-not all gun owners are conservatives and that 2-the NRA should concentrate on one thing: organizing classes, organizing events and protecting the 2nd amendment, but all of this with the interest of the people in mind, not that of the corporations.

Colt wants nothing more than peddle their CAR-15s to a wider market. This is not in the interest of the people.

[TheWraith]

6. No, we don't register our cars just to possess them.

You don't need a registration, or a license, to own and operate a car unless you use it on public roads. Furthermore, there has never been any evidence that registration reduces crime. Canada had for some years a total registration system, which the police there will tell you cost $2 billion dollars and solved basically no crimes.

As for the "terrorist watch list," how is it that so many people suddenly approve of the Bushie's bullshit secret lists when it has to do with guns?

[JanBrady]

10. You can't buy a car without having a driver's license in the state I live in.

[AtheistCrusader]

15. Which state?

[JanBrady]

44. I'm not going to say where I live. You can't buy a car here if you don't have a driver's license.

You are required to have a driver's license because you cannot purchase auto insurance without it, and you are required to have auto insurance in order to drive the car.

[AtheistCrusader]

48. Wrong.

You can drive an automobile on your own property without insurance or license.

I'm looking but if I go through all 50 state laws regarding this and don't find one that matches what you just claimed, i'm going to be pretty pissed.
I mean seriously, you won't say what state you claim this law exists in? Calling bullshit.

[PavePusher]

68. Agreeing with A.C.

Bullshit, unless you can cite to evidence.

[beevul]

33. Theres no "newspaper loophole"? N/T

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

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

[MrModerate]

13. And non-public roads are largely irrelevant to most auto users.

While automobile usage is seriously constrained because of their impact -- actual and potential -- on the public.

[beevul]

32. Thats not entirely accurate.

"While automobile usage is seriously constrained because of their impact -- actual and potential -- on the public."


I'll fix it:

Automobile usage IN PUBLIC , is seriously constrained because of their impact --actual and potential -- on the public.

A parallel exists to that - its called license to carry concealed.

[MrModerate]

36. Logically true, but from a practical point of view, meaningless.

And hence not an especially strong supporting argument for concealed carry.

The mileage devoted to non-public roads is insignificant compared to that devoted to public roads. The overwhelming majority of automobile use is on public roads/in public/affecting the public. And so autos are heavily regulated.

[beevul]

39. I wasn't trying to make one.

"And hence not an especially strong supporting argument for concealed carry."

I wasn't trying to make one.

My point, was where a thing, was and was not "regulated".

My aim in making that point, was to show the people who say "If we can register cars, we can register guns" that:

A) the parallel already exists, and;

B) That parallel falls short of what the people making that argument actually want.


They want to have guns seldom to never taken off ones own property, and NEVER used in public - like a car on a trailer - to be registered regardless. Which is far more than we have for cars, in all but a tiny handful of places.

[Callisto32]

42. I am confused as to how it is meaningless.

Use of both items, in public, is heavily regulated. It doesn't matter if one of the items is used publicly more frequently, does it? The people that are legally driving on public roads are subject to heavy regulation, the people that are carrying in public, are (generally) subject to heavy regulation. It seems an apt comparison to me.

Heck, to carry the gun in public, the regulations are even HEAVIER. To drive a car, I had to pass a test apparently written for drunk monkeys. To get a LTCF I had to submit to an FBI background check.

[TheWraith]

56. Are you confusing "private roads" with "places you can drive without public roads"?

Because around where I live, "off roading" in pickup trucks is ridiculously common, people driving through fields and privately built forest trails for fun. Many people who do that have cheap beater pickups specifically for that purpose--no registration, no plates, no safety inspection. And anyone can do it, even teens who don't have their licenses yet, with or without their parents.

There's a big distinction between an example drawn from your life, region, or hometown, and something that's a universal truth everywhere. I've had people on here tell me that there's no reason for anyone, anywhere, to need a gun. I, on the other hand, have wandered through the streets of downtown Pittsburgh at 2 AM, watching the people scatter from a drug sting under a freeway overpass. On the other end of the spectrum, I live in a place where the police respond in 30 minutes if you're lucky, an hour if you're not, and where you can see black bears and cougars within 5 miles of my house.

[MrModerate]

58. Even adding offroading, the "places you can drive without public roads" . . .

are insignificant -- based on vehicle miles driven -- when compared to public roads. I'd also maintain if you compared simple square feet drivable publicly vs non-public/offroad the same comparison would stand.

And while I'm a committed gun grabber, I don't say no one should have guns anywhere or ever. Police and military certainly need them. Those managing rural property where predators interfere with livestock or human safety generally need them.

OTOH, I'm far from convinced that carrying on the streets of Pittsburgh at 2am is going to do much good if you walk into a drug sting. And I think that people who live in average American towns and cities who tell me that they need to carry to venture safely into the community are flat wrong. Dickheads who think carrying a weapon to political meetings are beyond the pale and make me question whether they could pass a psychological evaluation. And having a gun in the house to protect oneself from home invasion seems paranoid.

Others may disagree.

[TheWraith]

87. First off, no one compared miles driven on-road versus offroad.

The point was that no registration or paper of any kind is needed to own a car if you don't take it out in public.

Anyway, you're entitled to your opinions that having a gun to protect one's home is "paranoid." But that opinion isn't based on fact. Even by the most cautious and conservative numbers, defensive gun uses in the US number in the hundreds of thousands per year. You can find at least one fellow on here who will relate the story of his own daughter frightening off a would-be rapist by displaying her handgun. I highly recommend the research of a fellow named Gary Kleck, of Florida State University. He started out from a generally anti-gun viewpoint only to realize that his own research showed the opposite of his expectations.

Your perspective is clearly one of someone who lives in a relatively low-crime area, which isn't very wild, where you can expect the police to respond rapidly, and you have never had to consider the possibility of defending yourself. The problem is that those assumptions don't apply to a great deal of the country, ranging from inner cities where you can get attacked going to or from work, to places like my home town where you have half a dozen police patrolling 600 square miles on a good day. Or where you can be targeted for who you are: there's another DUer who avidly practices with firearms not just because he's grown up in a rural area doing so it all his life, but because living there, he and his gay partner have been subjected to death threats.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

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

[oneshooter]

24. Can you cite proof of that statement? n/t

[JanBrady]

45. The NRA promotes killing machines. That makes it a terrorist organization.

[beevul]

52. Gun control and the groups which push it...

Gun control and the groups which push it are responsible for more sales of firearms than the nra.


What does that make them?

[hack89]

60. Such word games render the word terrorist meaningless. nt

[AzNick]

61. They do not "promote" killing machines

The right to own a firearm is a constitutional right. One of their goals is to protect it.

The NRA also organizes competitions & classes.

Classes are important. They put a lot of common sense in you.

The issue is that the NRA is also a political lobby.

[DonP]

64. Now you just sound really silly

"Killing Machines", come on, the hyperbole is a lot over the top considering there are more than a few NRA members right here on DU and I bet most of us haven't seen the memo to promote killing or terrorism.

Unless you live in one of only two states you can be surrounded by law abiding gun owners carrying concealed on any given day. Grocery store, cleaners, even the line in the bank to see a teller. Do oyu live in a constant state of anxiety and fear?

[lawodevolution]

22. I send in a lot of money to the NRA every year and I send them a letter explaining that I want no

Spam mail and that I want them to help fight against registration schemes, AWB, and any other gun control.

Keep whining and crying about the NRA, you can't do anything about them.

[Euromutt]

23. There are no people on the "terrorist watch" and "no-fly" lists; there are only names

Names like "David Nelson" and "John Williams" and "T. Kennedy," to name but three out of the estimated million on both lists. Everybody with that name is affected, as the late senator Ted Kennedy found out the had way (as, presumably, did uncounted numbers of individuals named Tamara, Terrence, Theresa, Thomas and Timothy Kennedy). Note that the so-called "terrorist watch list" is less severe than the "no-fly list"; people on the "watch" list are subjected to increased screening at airports, but they are allowed to actually board aircraft: that's how serious a threat they're considered to actually be.

Those lists are abominations of executive fiat, and entirely counter to the notions of due process and the rule of law, and one of the things I do hold against the Obama administration is that it didn't scrap those perversions on Day 1.

[spin]

28. That was one of the reasons I voted for Obama ...

Our rights were being trampled by the Bush administration using the excuse of the "War on Terror".

Unfortunately once the government gets power, it hates to give it up.

[RSillsbee]

27. Registration

Colonel Ernesto Bella: Yes... yes. Go to the sporting goods store. From the files obtain forms 4473. These will contain descriptions of weapons, and lists of private ownership.

[Arctic Dave]

37. Wayne lil peepee needs some new Italian loafers and silk suit.

Fuck the NRA, they are nothing more then a perpetual fundraising machine.

[Callisto32]

40. I won't flame you, but I would like to point a few things out.

Car registration is different. You do not have to register cars that will not be driven on the public roads, there is no registration requirement to own and operate a vehicle, only to operate one on public property. As far as I can tell, the registration is more about the yearly infusion of money to the state coffers than anything else. So, I suppose registration would be okay, so long as it is only to use publicly owned ranges open to anyone, for "free" and that the registration fees went to maintain those ranges and to provide instruction on those ranges.

As for the no-fly list? That is a serious due process issue. People secretly put on a list for things they don't know, and by the way there is no way to find out why you are on the list and appeal the decision. Such as list is not valid for ANY reason, as far as I can tell. If the state thinks someone is dangerous, they should have to prove their case publicly.

[RSillsbee]

43. Why the NRA does NOT support registration

W/ thanks to Beevul for doing the legwork

We're going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily -- given the political realities -- going to be very modest. . . . e'll have to start working again to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen the next law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal -- total control of handguns in the United States -- is going to take time. . . . The first problem is to slow down the number of handguns being produced and sold in this country. The second problem is to get handguns registered. The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition-except for the military, police, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors-totally illegal.

Pete Shields, founder of Handgun Control, Inc. which is now the Brady campaign


"Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal." U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, December 1993
The real whacko from Waco

We have to start with a ban on the manufacturing and import of handguns. From there we register the guns which are currently owned, and follow that with additional bans and acquisitions of handguns and rifles with no sporting purpose." Major Owens

[JanBrady]

46. The NRA is paranoid and preys on weaklings and idiots who believe guns = manhood.

[pipoman]

50. Do you feel the same about the ACLU?

Just checking for consistency.

[RSillsbee]

51. I wonder if Gabby Gifford thinks her gun makes her more manly?

That said what does your drivel have to do w/ what I actually posted?

[Katya Mullethov]

62. All I ever hear

IS GABBY GABBY GABBY !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yZHveWFvqM

[RSillsbee]

71. She's the perfect poster girl

for all the people that say we carry to make up for a small penis (guess her penis is really small)

[shadowrider]

74. This one ain't bad either

<img src="" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us"/><br/>Shot at 2010-03-25

[DonP]

65. Well, we do agree that someone here is definitely paranoid

Congratulations!

I wondered how long until some simpleton brought out the manhood/penis references.

That's how pro 2nd amendment people know you've got shit to say about the issue.

[PavePusher]

69. I see that your bigotry is carried openly. How wonderful for you. n/t

[pipoman]

49. I for one would join and send as much

as I could afford to send to the NRA if you and others (unfortunately within our party) were to advance any credible bill to register firearms. Show me the enumerated constitutional right to own a car. How about we compare to other enumerated civil liberties? Maybe we should have registration for free speech? Word have killed more people than guns.

And are you sure you are on the right forum? You will find little support in these parts for the nonsense "terrorist watch list and no-fly list". Are you actually supportive of these 2 abominations? Apparently. We will have to agree to disagree on your entire OP. I consider myself a civil libertarian. I consider the content of this op the antithesis of that of a civil libertarian, in fact authoritarian.

You request no response because your silly "vent" is reprehensible and indefensible...

[RSillsbee]

72. The problem w/ you plan

is that if you wait until the bill shows up it might be too late.

I get the magazines and they hat ( it looks so cut w/ the Obama sticker on it) and they never call me for money because I opted out

[guitar man]

54. Wow

Every time I've ever pointed out the fact to an anti-gunner that a would be mass murderer could easily mow down a crowd with a car, I always get a shreiking "you can't compare guns ith cars, guns were made only to kill!!1!!1!" but somehow all of a sudden they are comparable when talking of registration? Give me a break.

I'm sure it will piss some people off but I'm going to say it. The day we require blanket registration of firearms in this country will begin the countdown to the day that some asshole shows up at our homes with a fucking clipboard holding an inventory list of guns to be confiscated. And yes, said asshole will have thugs armed with GUNS to back him up in taking them.

So not no but hell no. No registration , no way, no how.

:grr:

[beevul]

55. Come now...

Come now, we all know that never happens.

[guitar man]

57. Oh yeah

*Slaps forehead* . I forgot. And nobody ever killed anybody with gasoline and matches, or fertilizer and fuel oil, or by flying airplanes into buildings or....

[Callisto32]

59. We saw the same kind of intellectual inconsistency in other places, recently.

Right after Heller and McDonald, all the anti-gunners were saying "you need to let the states be laboratories and not force an over-powering federal will on the states!!!!!1!!

Now its "we need uniform federal restrictions to keep us all safe from the guns11!!1!"

[guitar man]

63. Not only that but

A lot of the same people I witnessed screeching over keeping info private in the wake of 9-11 because they were afraid of govt abuse of such info. all of a sudden have no qualms about handing a list of gun owners and guns over to the govt and are so quick to assure us such info would NEVER be abused.

Sorry, I'm not buying it. The only way to keep the govt from abusing the info is to not let them get their hands on it in the first place.

[DonP]

70. They wanted to give all that data to Bush/Cheney!

We went through almost 8 long years of gun control fans here insisting that the Feds needed a complete list of every gun owners firearms. When you pointed out that they were demanding that we turn data over to Bush/Cheney, who were less than trustworthy to say the least, they didn't care - as long as it registered guns.

The hypocrisy was obvious and ironic. The same posters demanding registration were posting about impeachment of the Bush/Cheney administration in other threads on DU.

Inconsistency seems to be a Hallmark of Gun Control supporters, even if it means handing a list over to right wing fascists, as long as the guns are gone or going away.

[RSillsbee]

75. RE:They didn't care - as long as it registered guns.

I wonder if the fact that they knew their names weren't going to be on the list affected their decision making.

[Katya Mullethov]

86. If it dont cost nothin'

A thing aint worth nothin' .

[GreenStormCloud]

66. Amazing to see a progressive support the Bush No-fly list. N/T

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

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

[Glassunion]

79. You have an interesting point of view. Here is an interesting fact about it.

1. The late Ted Kennedy would be prohibited from buying a firearm under your plan. He was a danger to America according to your rules.
2. Someone exactly like the underwear-bomber would not be prohibited from obtaining a firearm. He was no danger to America according to your rules.

Interesting.

[KansasVoter]

80. The NRA is a lobby group for the gun industry. Selling guns is all they are worried about.

[X_Digger]

81. No, that would be the NSSF- the trade association of gun mfgs.

The NRA is no more a gun sales organ than Planned Parenthood is an abortion sales organ.

[KansasVoter]

82. LOL....gullible much? The gun companies LOVE the NRA.

[X_Digger]

83. All squirrels are mammals, but not all mammals are squirrels. n/t

[oneshooter]

84. You made a statement, I ask that you proove it. n/t

[jody]

85. Consider joining ACLU & NRA. You would then support ALL inalienable rights since the NRA supports

the Second Amendment and ACLU supports all the others, excluding the 2nd.

[Glassunion]

88. Is there a 3rd Amendment Foundation? There are two army tents setup in my back yard.

Could be the neighbor's kids, but one can never be too sure.

[jody]

90. Interesting, after WWII Norman Rockwell attended the Third National Scout Jamboree and was inspired

to paint "The Scoutmaster" below.

Some people complained that Rockwell used Army pup tents for his setting and caused him to repaint the tents so they did not extend all the way to the ground.

I've been a scout and scouter for 63 years in several countries and have a print of that picture over my desk to remind me of the wonderful times I had with kids and watched them grow into adults today leading corporations, governments, and charitable organizations.