NRA homepage talking crap about kerry AGAIN.

[UpsideDownFlag]

http://www.nra.org/

[FeebMaster]

1. Who cares?

Who cares about the NRA or what they say?

[UpsideDownFlag]

2. ...several of our rkbaer's do. i've read their posts

"rethinking the NRA", etc.

[UpsideDownFlag]

3. AND the NRA happens to be the biggest pro-gun, pro-rkba org in the US

[DBoon]

5. The NRA is the largest anti-labor group in the USA

See my post #4...

[FeebMaster]

6. I thought they were the largest gun control org in the US

what with all of the gun control they've supported over the years.

[FeebMaster]

7. Rethinking the NRA

is an old, old thread started by someone who doesn't even post in the dungeon. It's a good thread and one of the ones that should make you realize that the pro-gun control position is a minority view on DU.

[Paladin]

9. Pro-Gun Control Is The Minority Position At DU?

Care to test that little notion out in General Discussion, Feeb? Don't bother.

You really need to get a grip and understand that the situation here in Justice/Public Safety, where you RKBA radicals have set up shop, bears no relation to Democratic politics as reflected in other DU forums. That kind of hubris-laden thinking is a sure path to an ass-kicking, as you ought to know by now......

[FeebMaster]

12. We have, time and time again.

There are numerous threads up in GD backing it up. You don't have to take my word for it.



You really need to get a grip and understand that the situation here in Justice/Public Safety, where you RKBA radicals have set up shop, bears no relation to Democratic politics as reflected in other DU forums. That kind of hubris-laden thinking is a sure path to an ass-kicking, as you ought to know by now......

Hubris has nothing to do with it. The evidence is there for anyone to see. You're right about one thing, though, the situation here in Justice/Public Safety bears no relation to Democratic politics as reflected in other DU forums. Up in GD, the really whiny gun grabbers are an even smaller minority than they are here. Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying the majority of DU doesn't support gun control of some kind, just that they would consider themselves pro-gun and be considered by others as pro-gun.

[UpsideDownFlag]

33. pro gun dems may be the majority in the gungeon...

but they are the underwhelming minority of DU.

[FeebMaster]

35. In your dreams.

DU is by far more pro-gun than you'll ever care to admit.

[UpsideDownFlag]

36. really?

it seems to me that there is a 500 percent upsurge of RKBAers in the gungeon when compared to anywhere else.

[FeebMaster]

37. Whatever helps you sleep at night. (nt)

[Lefty48197]

13. You gotta open the windows when you clean you guns Feeb

the solvents are getting to you!

[FeebMaster]

14. I'm not a gun owner. (nt)

[Paladin]

16. Say What???

So....you're rabidly RKBA, you support the de-regulation of silencers, you want everybody to have the opportunity to shoot one another in duels,you believe that the police should be stripped of the right to carry firearms (presumably in furtherance of RKBA Wet Dream #45,687: Heroic Armed Citizens Shoot The Bad Guys Themselves), you can't wait for the AWB to come to an end, and.....you're not a gun owner?

God, Feeb....that's like being married to a beautiful woman and saying you don't like to fuck. This forum gets more entertaining by the day.....

[FeebMaster]

17. That's right.

Not a gun owner.


you believe that the police should be stripped of the right to carry firearms (presumably in furtherance of RKBA Wet Dream #45,687: Heroic Armed Citizens Shoot The Bad Guys Themselves)

More like Feeb's nightmare #20,027: Jumpy cop puts 15 rounds in Feeb's back while he's reaching for his registration probably brought on by reading yet another story of a cop or three putting 40 rounds into some unarmed guy from behind. Or maybe Feeb's nightmare #20,028, which is a lot like $20,027 only the cop, like most of the cops we hear about, is a horrendous shot and leaves Feeb paralyzed for life.



God, Feeb....that's like being married to a beautiful woman and saying you don't like to fuck. This forum gets more entertaining by the day.....

Yes I am aware of the irony involved. Truly it will be a sad day when I finally get a gun. No longer will I be able to respond to the screeching of gun grabbers who say "all you care about is your guns" and other assorted whines with "I'm not a gun owner." Almost makes me not want to buy a gun.

[library_max]

49. There's a word I'm trying to remember -

five letter word - starts with "T" - refers to a person who posts on an online discussion board not because he or she has any interest in the subject matter of the board, but simply to make outrageous statements in the hope of stirring up arguments and upsetting or angering the other posters.

[FeebMaster]

50. Right. I'm obviously a troll because I don't own guns.

Wow. That's pure genius. Obviously, not being a gun owner personally, I can't possibly care about the issue and certainly have no business discussing it.

Hmm. Are you a gun owner, library_max, or just a troll here to make outrageous statements about an issue you have no interest in?

[library_max]

53. I am a Democrat who is opposed to the private ownership of firearms.

And I don't own a gun. That's consistent.

You're purportedly a die-hard cold-dead-fingers RKBAer, but you don't actually own a gun. And you spend your spare time thinking up ways that civilian ownership of firearms could be revoked with no legal or political problems, or so you claim. That's not consistent.

[FeebMaster]

54. Consistent, suuuuure.

You're purportedly a die-hard cold-dead-fingers RKBAer, but you don't actually own a gun.

Actually, in the "would you turn your guns in?" thread I said I would turn in any gun I'd bought that could be traced back to me. So I'm not really a cold-dead-fingers RKBAer. But other than that, there's nothing purported about it, at least not anymore than anyone else's claims about themselves.


And you spend your spare time thinking up ways that civilian ownership of firearms could be revoked with no legal or political problems, or so you claim.

It didn't take that long. It's obvious to anyone who has read the current gun laws. As I've repeatedly said, you don't have to take my word for it.


That's not consistent.

It's completely consistent. Has a single gun control supporter here taken heed of my advice? Have most of them even bothered to read it? My point with the whole "How to ban guns" posts has always been twofold. First of all, arguing about bayonet lugs all day every day gets old, fast. Second, it shows the gun control crowd in all their incompetent glory. All they care about is the now dead AWB and the occasional other crappy law. I'd much rather argue gun control with a competent gun control supporter who actually has a clue about guns and gun laws, sadly that's a creature that doesn't exist outside of mythology.

[library_max]

55. You said you'd turn in any guns you own, but you don't own any guns.

Yeah, that's consistent. My apologies. /sarcasm off/

:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[FeebMaster]

57. First of all

I didn't say I'd turn in any guns that I own. I said I'd turn in any guns that could be traced to me. Obviously, or apparently not so obviously, I was referring to any guns I might come into possession of in the future. Just because I don't currently own guns doesn't mean that I won't own guns in the future. I hope you understand what I was saying now because I don't think I can possibly explain it in simpler terms than I have already done. I'm sorry this is so complicated for you.

[library_max]

59. And you know, if this was the first thread

in which I'd ever read one of your posts, I might be inclined to take all this you're saying at face value. However, I've read enough of your posts to know you better now.

[FeebMaster]

61. What the hell are you talking about now?

Do you just randomly post things? Do you read any of the posts you respond to?

What about my last post is so complicated that you can't take it at face value and have to pretend as if I'm trying to mislead you?

[MrBenchley]

56. "Has a single gun control supporter here taken heed of my advice?"

"that's like being married to a beautiful woman and saying you don't like to fuck"...and now you act surprised and hurt nobody cares how you are in the sack....

[FeebMaster]

58. Where did I claim I was surprised?

I posted my explanations on how to ban guns knowing full well that two posts later the gun grabbers would be whining about the AWB again.

[library_max]

60. And by the way, the shoe must fit pretty well

for you to come up with the right word so quickly.

[FeebMaster]

62. Yeah, either that or I'm not a moron.

See, unlike some people, I generally read the posts I'm responding to. So when you said "There's a word I'm trying to remember - five letter word - starts with "T" - refers to a person who posts on an online discussion board not because he or she has any interest in the subject matter of the board, but simply to make outrageous statements in the hope of stirring up arguments and upsetting or angering the other posters." it wasn't all that hard to figure out.

[enfield collector]

8. how did our party get hijacked by the gun grabbers?

[Lefty48197]

15. If you're talking about MY Democratic party,

then you've made some mistaken assumption about mind control or some such.
What really happened was that three of our heroes were murdered in a span of only five short years. The Kennedy brothers, and MLK convinced us that there were too many nuts getting their hands on too many guns, and that something HAD to be done. I think we've taken the right position.

[UpsideDownFlag]

65. ouch, well said. nt

[DBoon]

4. Here is an interesting article that explains some of this

About how the NRA is a major force in getting the rural working class to support politicians opposed to their interests:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04248/373232.stm

Quoting:
"Arrayed against them are numerous pro-business groups like the Chamber of Commerce, trade organizations and thousands of well-funded corporate political action committees that are equally committed to electing politicians who oppose labor's aims. So which of these many groups represents the greatest threat to the political interests of American workers?

It might surprise you to know that the answer is none of the above. In fact, there is significant evidence that the one organization that has historically done the most damage to labor politically, and that has the most potential to defeat pro-labor, pro-worker candidates in 2004, is the National Rifle Association"

[Redneck Socialist]

10. Gee, there's a surprise. n/t

[hansberrym]

11. That's the same crap some anti-individual-RKBA enthusiasts...

have been spreading.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=68601&mesg_id=68604&page=

[thomas82]

18. Well

If he would quit being Anti-gun the NRA asshats couldnt say anything bad about him. Gun control is a losing issue, all it does is cost votes.
Tom

[UpsideDownFlag]

19. yeah, that's it. the problem is kerry.

[thomas82]

21. No

I think if the anti gun issues were dropped we would get more single issue(gun owners)votes. If Senator Kerry would drop his Anti gun support the NRA would have no ammo to use against him right?
Tom

[library_max]

22. Yes, they'd have their money and their willingness to lie.

What more would they need? That's all the Republicans themselves have, come to that.

[DavidMS]

34. I must disagree

Centering the democratic party message on class war, not cultural war is the best thing for the party. Combined with being avowedly anti-NRA but pro gun (talking about how the NRA hates working class hunters because the org is distracting them from the larger class struggle).

This stragedy will aleinate some segments of Hollywood (not a bad thing) and many white collar professionals (who drank the rethug cool aid) and talk about how most white collar professionals have more in common with iron workers and burger flippers (because the Rethugs want to downsize and outsource you, nothing personal).

The hardest part of the stragety is that it requires telling Maureen Dood and Charles Kunthammer that we don't care what you think because all you do is get paid to regurgate conventional wisdom.

Cultural issues are fine, but class biased appeals (Clinton was able to manage it via personal magnetism) are the best way to fight the right., IMHO.

[library_max]

20. The NRA gives all its money to Republicans no matter what.

It's a fallacy to say that it's Kerry's fault that the NRA is against him. Besides, Kerry and Bush have both said they support the AWB. In what other way is Kerry "anti-gun"?

[thomas82]

23. Well first of all

This is not a reply to bash Senator Kerry.

This reply is to answer library_max's question on how and when has Senator Kerry voted for Gun restrictions.

Some of these may be considered good and some bad. The point I am trying to make is this: If Senator Kerry would quit supporting further anti gun legislation the NRA would no have any Ammo to use in accusing him of being a gun grabber. And by supporting gun owners he can garner the support of the gun owners of America.

Ok here they are and like I said this is not an attempt to bash the Senator. There are probably more, but these are a few of the major ones:

Senator Kerry has voted nine times in favor of banning semi-automatic firearms (so called Assault weapons) which would include the Remington 1100 shotgun and the Mini 14.

Senator Kerry along with Senator Kennedy have voted to ban most center-fire rifle ammunition, including the most common rounds used by hunters and target shooters (30-06, 308 etc).

Senator Kerry has voted to close off hundreds of thousands of acres of the California Mohave Desert to hunting. (Senator Kerry quit giving ammo to the NRA. You support hunters don't take their land away)

Senator Kerry has voted to hold the highly regulated American firearms industry legally responsible for the illegal acts of violent criminals. (blame the criminal not the gun maker).

Senator Kerry was one of only 29 Senators to vote to prohibit gun manufacturers from discharging debts created by the reckless lawsuits filed by municipalities.(cities suing gun makers because of gun crimes)

Senator Kerry has voted to allow BATF to conduct unlimited, warrant-less inspections of FFL holders. (If you are a gun dealer they can come in you business anytime they want).

Senator Kerry has voted to criminalize legal sales between private individuals at gun shows. (I cannot sell my own property?)

Senator Kerry has voted to force many small firearms dealers out of business, which would have impacted both the availability and price of guns, particularly in rural areas. (Gotta keep the poor unarmed right?)

Senator Kerry has voted 11 times to force law-abiding citizens to wait to exercise their Second Amendment rights. He voted to keep the federal waiting period after the National Instant Check System was in place. (this is not a bad Idea, but if you pass the background check why should you have to wait?)

Senator Kerry voted twice to eliminate the Civilian Marksmanship Program.

Tom

[library_max]

24. Gee, how did I manage to miss your speech at the Convention?

Did they put you on right after Zell? Because I was throwing up at that time.

[thomas82]

25. I just ansered your

Question. There it is in black and white.I called it like it is.

If Senator Kerry would drop the Anti gun agenda he would have the votes of most gun owners of America.
Tom

[icehouse]

26. In case no one has bothered to look lately

We, I mean Kerry,is traling bush in the polls right now. If we knocked off the anti-gun talk and enbraced the 2nd for what it is, we could gain that much more support and clean house in November.

My 2 cents

Shawn

[thomas82]

27. Yea he needs to come out and say..

He supports all gun owners. If he would quit supporting bills like S1431 and such, more gun owners would trust and vote for him.
Tom

[library_max]

42. And yet another RKBAer gets his "wings." /nt

[iverglas]

44. calling it like it is

Senator Kerry has voted to criminalize legal sales between private individuals at gun shows. (I cannot sell my own property?)

Senator Kerry has voted to force many small firearms dealers out of business, which would have impacted both the availability and price of guns, particularly in rural areas. (Gotta keep the poor unarmed right?)

Damn, that sounds so much to me like "Senator Kerry voted umpty-seven thousand times to raise taxes". Here I was thinking that that one was demagoguery at its finest, and comes along a few to overtake it.

Can you provide directions to his vote "to criminalize legal sales between private individuals at gun shows"? "to force many small firearms dealers out of business"?

I assume that the bills in question will be called something like
- An Act to Make it Illegal for Private Individuals to Sell Things that it is Legal to Sell at Gun Shows,
and
- An Act to Force Many Small Firearms Dealers out of Business.

If they aren't, I'll be concluding that your own agenda drowned out your integrity in this instance. I have the prima facie evidence for that conclusion, I think, but you're welcome to prove me wrong.


As far as

If Senator Kerry would drop the Anti gun agenda he would have the votes of most gun owners of America.

I merely laugh.

Especially because it just struck me that I'm talking to air. Oh well, pointing at demagoguery never goes amiss. I should just add that after typing the above, about the bills supposedly in question, I checked and saw that Romulus had already pointed at it, and I've just said the same thing in different words, and now I shall fall over in a dead faint.

[Romulus]

28. suggestion: you need some cites

to beef up your argument. If not a link, then a description of the actual bills beyond the NRA sound bites. The NRA website puts some spin on the bills at issue. (Edited to add: I see that you cut and pasted from the NRA website, so it's not your fault there are no cites. The NRA does cite to Cong. Record votes, but not the bills at issue, so we can't see that the bills actually said)

For instance:

Senator Kerry has voted to hold the highly regulated American firearms industry legally responsible for the illegal acts of violent criminals. (blame the criminal not the gun maker).


I guess this refers to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms bill. Kerry's voting AGAINST the bill did NOT "hold" the industry responsible for the acts of violent crimes.

The bill would have stripped courts of the jurisdiction to hear tort claims against firearms manufacturers, distributors, etc., for harm caused by misuse of their product that could have been prevented by reasonable acts of those defendants.

Just like the auto industry could be sued for making a car that any moron could get in and drive w/o permission, when the makers reasonably could have prevented the incident from occurring (keyed ignition, anyone?). Or marketing cars through gray market distributors in a way to facilitate how illegal drag racers circumvent existing laws to get their hands on the otherwise-unavailable-to-them cars.


Another:
The center-fire-ammo ban - was actually a law to allow the AG to set standards for ammo specifically designed and marketed to be armor-piercing, so that subset could be deemed LEO only. It did NOT ban all center-fire rifle ammo (despite Ted Kennedy's blathering about the .30-30).

[thomas82]

29. OK

Senator Kerry has voted to hold the highly regulated American firearms industry legally responsible for the illegal acts of violent criminals. (blame the criminal not the gun maker).

Yes they want to be able to sue a gun manufacturer if a person uses their gun in a crime (VA/Maryland sniper) this would be like you suing ford cause I ran over you with my truck.

Or better yet I break into your house and steal a baseball bat kill someone and you are sued for not securing the bat

I guess this refers to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms bill. Kerry's voting AGAINST the bill did NOT "hold" the industry responsible for the acts of violent crimes.

Then why did the families attempt to sue Bushmaster? They also tried to sue the gun shop the AR15 was stolen from. So I steal a Ford from your driveway run over/kill a bunch of kids, then you get sued/held accountable. Pretty stupid right?

The bill would have stripped courts of the jurisdiction to hear tort claims against firearms manufacturers, distributors, etc., for harm caused by misuse of their product that could have been prevented by reasonable acts of those defendants.

Just like the auto industry could be sued for making a car that any moron could get in and drive w/o permission, when the makers reasonably could have prevented the incident from occurring (keyed ignition, anyone?). Or marketing cars through gray market distributors in a way to facilitate how illegal drag racers circumvent existing laws to get their hands on the otherwise-unavailable-to-them cars.

So car manufactures should be sued cause someone steals them and commits a crime with them? how in the hell did that pass??


Another:
The center-fire-ammo ban - was actually a law to allow the AG to set standards for ammo specifically designed and marketed to be armor-piercing, so that subset could be deemed LEO only. It did NOT ban all center-fire rifle ammo (despite Ted Kennedy's blathering about the .30-30).

So essential if this bill passed any ammo that could penetrate body armor would be banned. So the majority of hunting rounds would be outlawed (we wont take guns we will take their ammo)

Now do you understand whey these are bad bill? Anyone that would vote for these bills would never get the trust of gun owners.
Tom

[library_max]

30. Ask him to support his talking points, he gives you more talking points.

Oh well. Thanks for trying, Romulus.

[Romulus]

31. not exactly

IIRC, the Bushmaster suit alleged that Bushmaster still supplied Bullseye Shooters Supply with the Bushmaster products even after Bullseye had been cited with "inventory control" issues by the ATF.

Because of the "inventory control" problems, Malvo & Co. were able to shoplift the rifle out of the store.

The "inventory control" problems were the basis of the suit against Bullseye, too.

People have been sued for not safeguarding firearms that were stolen and used by criminals to hurt the tort plaintiffs. If you didn't know that, well now you do, so you'd better think about that. (This is one of the primary reasons I bough a Gunvault for my handguns, even though I have no kids.)

That's the tort system for you - just as how people could be/have been sued for leaving car keys in the ignition so that their known or unknown neighborhood delinquents could joyride and kill someone.

Basic tort claims come down to (1) was the problem foreseeable?, and (2) did you do what you reasonably could to keep that problem from happening?

The AP bill only targeted ammo that was designed and marketed as being AP. Whether it already was "AP" is not the concern of the bill, only the supposed purpose of the ammo.

[thomas82]

32. OK good points

That's the tort system for you - just as how people could be/have been sued for leaving car keys in the ignition so that their known or unknown neighborhood delinquents could joyride and kill someone.

I didn't realize this, It makes sense

The AP bill only targeted ammo that was designed and marketed as being AP. Whether it already was "AP" is not the concern of the bill, only the supposed purpose of the ammo.

Now on this issue: the problem with "Armor Piercing" Is they would define it as "Body Armor piercing" i.e bullet proof vests etc.

This would mean the most of the hunting ammo would be banned 30-06/30-30/308 etc as all would easily go thru a bullet proof vest(without trauma plates).

I know it sounds stupid, but unless the law clearly defines Armor as The type of Armor on a Tank or Armored personnel carrier this law could be horribly redefined as banning hunting and target center fire ammo just because they can penetrate bullet proof vests.
Tom

[RoeBear]

38. Ohhh...ohhh..ohhh...

...who is surprised that the NRA is talking crap about Kerry? They've decided to back Bush (why I don't know) and it seems to be the modis operandi of any organization that backs one candidate over another one. Why I bet someone so inclined could find the VPC talking crap about ole Bushie too. So what? Who's surprised?

[library_max]

39. "The VPC talking crap about ole Bushie"???

So your assumption is that, just as the NRA is lying about Kerry, the VPC must be telling the truth about Bush. If that were actually the case, what would be wrong with it? Which side are you on, anyhow?

[jack99]

40. I think what he is trying to say is:

The NRA supports Bushy as he wanted the AWB dead. He just had Delay and Frist take the blame/jump on the grenade.

The VPC supports the ban along with Senator Kerry (bad move IMO as it will only cost him votes)that is why the NRA talks crap about him.

I believe it would have been beneficial to Senator Kerry to let the AWB issues die.

Their are so much bigger issues:Iraq, budget etc. On these issues alone he should beat shrub.

By not making a big issue out of the AWB he can still save face with gun owners, thus more votes.
Jack

[library_max]

41. Bush and Kerry said exactly the same thing about the AWB.

They both came out in favor of it.

The NRA always supports Republicans against Democrats, no matter what the issues, gun or otherwise. They will lie about any Democratic candidate, no matter what that candidate's stands are or aren't on the subject of guns.

[MrBenchley]

43. So is the GOA...

and pretty much every gun owner forum around....

Good thing we've got our "pro gun democrats" out speaking u-oh wait, they got nothing but excuses as to why they can't say anything pro-Democrat out loud on those forums. Although they don't mind posting right wing horseshit here.

[MrBenchley]

45. Wonder which gun nut organization is attacking

Dan Rather and Terry McAuliffe this AM, trying to stick up for pResident Deserter?

If you said the NRA, you'd be right.

[UpsideDownFlag]

46. to quote some of our RKBAers, "who cares"?

it's not like they weild massive influence in the pro-gun world or anything. it's not like they're on the same side as "the awb is gone, yay-oops...i got tombstoned" people.

[MrBenchley]

47. You'll notice that the police union endorsing Kerry got ignored

but the phony police union's love letter to pResident Toot got its own thread from our "pro gun democrats"...

[UpsideDownFlag]

48. indeed. nt

[Endangered Specie]

51. I think we know which side their bread is buttered...

If you know what I mean.

[MrBenchley]

52. Something else that's funny...

The web is lousy with RKBA "scholars" spouting rubbish about "the militia isn't the National Guard", which is also a major propaganda point for both major gun groups. Yet just the other day, Chimpy went to the National Guard association and said out loud that every President in history who had anything to do with any militia was IN the National Guard.

Not a peep of complaint about that anywhere...makes you realize what those groups and that "scholarship" is really worth, don't it?

If Kerry had said it, I'd hate to guess how many threads by "pro-gun democrats" moaning and pissing about it there'd be.

[MrBenchley]

63. Guess which knot of demented right wing extremists is

attacking Kerry THIS morning?

If you said NRA you'd be right.

[UpsideDownFlag]

64. or how about ALL of them? nt

[MrBenchley]

66. Without a peep of protest from "pro gun democrats"

Even Alan Colmes shifts in his chair and blinks once in a while....

Meanwhile, you'll notice there's no shyness by our RKBAers about posting right wing horseshit HERE.

[UpsideDownFlag]

67. hey there- anyone who accuses that of being RW talking points

is full of shit, remember?

[MrBenchley]

68. Yup, it's just a coincidence that the politicians peddling this crap

are the extreme fringe of the right wing...

[UpsideDownFlag]

69. no, see, the vast majority of them come in all political stripes.

feh.

[MrBenchley]

70. A bipartisan issue, the way a football game that ends 85-15 is a tie

(snicker)