Cars and vans can be traced

Quoted:
And when exactly will we here an NRA response to these charges in a public forum?


I'm not holding my breath.

mike

Quoted:
Yes, the NRA has a lot to answer for.  How come the entire state of MD isn't armed in case some idiot decides to pull up in a white van and start shooting people.

Well???

Get off your asses NRA.  Join forces with the GOA and get something done.

Quoted:
And when exactly will we here an NRA response to these charges in a public forum?


I'm not holding my breath.

mike

Quoted:
And when exactly will we here an NRA response to these charges in a public forum?


I'm not holding my breath.

mike

Quoted:
Yes, the NRA has a lot to answer for.  How come the entire state of MD isn't armed in case some idiot decides to pull up in a white van and start shooting people.

Well???

Get off your asses NRA.  Join forces with the GOA and get something done.

Quoted:


They need "'mo money"....

Quoted:
Let's see, almost 200 million gun-owners in the USA and only 4 million NRA members.

Quoted:
   In words of one syllable:   Why don't you stop criticizing the only pro-weapons group that has even a snowball's chance in hell of holding the line against the anti-gun yo-yo's, and HELP!
    Or would you rather just try to make-fun of those of us who are doing it for you?


   

Quoted:


Maybe you oughta press the button called "user info" before you shoot your yap....

Quoted:


I agree.

Just to correct your stats:
1. There are 280 million people in the US.
2. Estimates put the number of firarms at about 200 million.
3. There are between 80 - 90 million gun owners in the US.
4. There are anywhere between 70 and 80 million handguns in the US.

1 in 3 US residents own a firearm.
The average firearm owner owns almost 3 guns of which one is a handgun.

Quoted:



    Rather, maybe you should do a little research before you reply to a post that you don't know anything about.
    Remember, putz, always make sure your brain is engaged before you put your mouth in gear.

Quoted:
a little 'mo....

[b]The NRA is to the 2nd Amendment
as H & R Block is to the 16th.
by Gary Clark
March 29, 2002

KeepAndBearArms.com — A March 12, 2002 news item got me thinking. It was titled "Gun Violence Prevention Groups Claim Victory as H&R Block Severs Ties with National Rifle Association." It wasn't the article itself, or what the article was about that was significant. It was the title that used the names "NRA" and "H & R Block" in the same sentence. Seeing those two names together reminded me of something too many people in the pro 2nd Amendment movement either don't see or refuse to recognize, the effect of self-interest.

We live in a time characterized by far broader concerns over issues of liberty and unconstitutional encroachment upon liberty by government than just those centered on the Second Amendment. Over the last quarter century or so (a period concurrent with the gun control vs. 2nd Amendment battle) we have also seen the rise of an ever-growing anti-income tax movement. And, just as the gun control battle orbits a Constitutional amendment so too does the battle over the income tax. We've all seen serious and well-researched assertions that the 16th Amendment that created the income tax was never legally ratified. We're also seeing the government refusing to address the issue.

So, what's all this got to do with the NRA and H & R Block? Plenty! Why? Because of a fact of life far too many of us in the pro 2nd Amendment movement either fail to see or refuse to acknowledge. That fact of life centers on the economic self-interest of an organization and its leadership.

Expecting the NRA to support the position that "shall not be infringed" means just that -- no permits can be required if it's a "right" and not a "privilege" -- is a lot like expecting H & R Block to support the position that the 16th Amendment was never legally ratified.

If the 16th Amendment and the income tax are thrown out, H & R Block is out of business. That much is pretty obvious, but Block does not hold itself out to be opposed to the income tax. The situation is very different where the NRA is concerned, and this is what gives rise to the dichotomy of opinion about the NRA within the pro 2nd Amendment movement.

We all need to become more aware of what the NRA is and has been historically. We then need to take a really hard look at what the strongest supporters and members of the NRA do for a living. Looking at it this way reveals one likely reason why the NRA refuses to support the position that no permits or registrations should be required if firearms ownership is a "right" that "shall not be infringed."

The NRA is, and has historically been, the single strongest advocate (and provider) of firearms use and safety training. Think about this for a minute. How many firearm use and safety course instructors do you know of who are NOT NRA certified? According the the NRA's own website, there are currently some 38,000 NRA Certified Instructors throughout the United States. The NRA may not be the only organization that certifies gun use and safety instructors, but it is certainly the single biggest one. 38,000 NRA Certified Instructors averages 760 per state. The numbers alone prove the NRA virtually owns the firearms instruction certification market in this country. Now there's nothing wrong with this. The NRA does a wonderful job teaching gun safety and certifying instructors. It's what they're really good at and I fully approve of what they do in this regard. Personally, I think every gun owner should take at least one gun use and safety course from an NRA certified instructor. I don't think any governmental body should require it though.

Now take a look around the country. Most states have now become "shall issue" states and in every one of them (that I know of) the "issue" of the "permit" requires two things:

1.  A clean criminal record
2.  Attending and passing some form of firearms use and safety course

Where do you think the instructors for these courses come from? Wouldn't you have to assume that with 38,000 NRA certified firearm safety instructors in the U.S. that most (if not nearly all) of the people who teach the courses required for CCW permits are among those 38,000? I would. Now ask yourself this: How many of these NRA certified instructors, whose economic life depends upon a steady stream of course attendees, are likely to support the position that it is illegal and unconstitutional for any level of government to REQUIRE gun permits and gun safety courses? While you're at it, take a look at the NRA as a national organization. What do they sell and profit from? It is the sponsorship of gun training and gun safety courses and teaching materials. Furthermore, this is what the NRA has been doing for over a hundred years. It is their core business. Do you REALLY expect them to support the position that gun permits (and the training required by them) are unconstitutional? If you do, I've got a bridge between Manhattan and Brooklyn I'll sell you cheap.

Gun control isn't like being pregnant. Being pregnant is a binary state. Someone either IS or ISN'T pregnant. But gun control exists on a continuum. You can have total gun control, such as outright bans, or only a little gun control, such as permits.

The mistake too many in the pro 2nd Amendment movement make is the assumption that the NRA is opposed to gun control. This assumption is false. The NRA is, always has been, and will continue to be a PRO GUN CONTROL ORGANIZATION! They will always support requirements for permits and attendance at gun safety and training classes because teaching these classes is what the economic life of so many of the NRA's strongest supporters, depends upon. Any assertion that the NRA does not virtually "own" the firearms and gun safety instructor training and certification market in this country is like making the assertion that Microsoft does not virtually "own" the computer operating system market. Both are obvious on their face.

It is because of this that I do not belong to, nor support the NRA in any way. Supporting the NRA is supporting (a form of) gun control and I am opposed to ALL forms of gun control... unless you define "gun control" as being capable of putting a .30 round through an enemy of the Constitution's left eye at 300 yards.

Gary Clark is a writer, small business owner and staunch defender of the right of every individual to own, bear and use ANY type of weapon that can be carried on the person. He lives in Las Vegas and can be reached by e-mail at [email protected].




Clown, you can quote every moronic, dopey bunch of crap you've ever read.
    But, the same as your bible-quoting nonsense, no one is listening.
   Save your keyboard fingers. You're probably going to need them for a more personal reason.
    You indicate that you are not a NRA member. Your loss.
    Here's a tip from someone older and wiser than you, sonny: Cut a check for $35.00 to the NRA.
    Maybe, then, you'll finally realize that there are people smarter and more experienced than you are.
    But you probably won't. You'll still slam the NRA and all it hasn't done fore you.
    You should be ashamed of yourself.
   But then again, that requires the knowledge that you are wrong.
    And, you're not wrong, are you?

Quoted:
Here's a tip from someone older and wiser than you, sonny:

Cut a check for $35.00 to the NRA.

Maybe, then, you'll finally realize that there are people smarter and more experienced than you are.

But you probably won't. You'll still slam the NRA [blue]and all it hasn't done fore you.[/blue]

You should be ashamed of yourself.
   But then again, that requires the knowledge that you are wrong.
    And, you're not wrong, are you?

Quoted:
From world net daily

[b]Has the NRA gone soft?
by Joseph Farah, Worldnetdaily.com


Ignatius Piazza has a dream.

He wants to build the safest community in the world -- a well-armed one on 550 acres in Nevada.

Called Front Sight, Piazza's dreamland serves primarily today as a Disneyland for shooting enthusiasts -- a site where he offers instruction on the use of firearms, including Uzi submachine guns.

When it's finished, the community will have 12 shooting ranges, an assault tower, 400 yards of training tunnels, 177 home lots, a convenience store and a private K-12 school. About $3 million of infrastructure is in the ground and the total project is expected to cost some $25 million.

You might think such a resort -- even in the Nevada desert -- might cause something of a political stir. It has not. In fact, rather favorable stories have been written about Piazza's project in the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, the London Times and USA Today.

[red]But there is one place you won't read about Piazza's Front Sight. You won't read about it in any publications associated with the National Rifle Association -- at least not for the foreseeable future.

Why?

The political climate is not right for any reference to a project involving machine guns.

I'm not kidding.

The fascinating plan is off limits as a topic in the NRA. That's the official word I got from Joe Graham, director of publications for the organization.[/red]

[blue]"It's just not the right political climate with elections so near," he said. "Nobody wants to hear about machine guns right now. We don't need to take a step backward. We need to move forward."[/blue][rolleyes]

In fact, Graham confirmed for me, [red]the NRA will not even accept paid advertising from Piazza and Front Sight if there is any reference to the free machine-gun training the company offers to law-abiding citizens and law enforcement officers as well.[/red]

Does it seem strange to you that you can read about Piazza's Front Sight project in dozens of articles in mainstream news sources but not in the publications of the nation's premiere gun organization? It certainly does to Piazza.

[red]"What in the hell is the NRA thinking when they are afraid to tell their millions of members about an opportunity to receive a day of world-class training with an Uzi submachine gun, plus the ammunition, food and beverages all free of charge?" he asks rhetorically. "What in the hell is the NRA thinking when they refuse to accept an advertisement from a leader in the firearms training industry that has already trained over 6,500 law-abiding citizens and police officers together in the safe and responsible use of a submachine gun -- all free of charge?"[/red]

Has the NRA gone soft? Has it gone establishment? Is it too concerned about what its gun-grabbing enemies will think about it?

Graham says the NRA's political adversaries monitor its publications and use anything they can as ammunition against the organization and the right to bear arms. But Piazza thinks that kind of defensive thinking is timid and self-defeating.

[red]"If any organization in the world should be shouting positively and encouraging their members to take advantage of such a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, it should be the NRA," Piazza said. "Instead, we are told that they don't want to touch anything that involves submachine guns due to political fallout."[/red]

He continues: "The NRA's fears are quite simply pathetic. The NRA's lack of courage to promote the safe and responsible, free training in the use of a submachine gun is disgusting. The sad fact is that the people who are really losing out are the millions of NRA members who won't find out that they could have received a $500 course in Las Vegas, free of charge. They won't find out until it is too late and we are no longer offering the course for free."

One gun activist I know who took the course gave it a thumbs up.

"It is professionally run and certainly lives up to its billing," she said. "You are taught proper technique in using a fully automatic firearm under proper supervision."

Piazza offers the free courses as a way of attracting interest and positive publicity for the bigger Front Sight picture and two- and four-day courses in pistol, rifle and shotgun use.

[red]"Maybe what the NRA wants us to offer is a free musket course or a free sporting clays course," Piazza says derisively. "The NRA could then report on such courses without the fear of upsetting their slave masters in Washington. I guess if the NRA ran a story about Front Sight's uniquely positive and extremely successful free submachine gun courses, the NRA might actually have to stand up and tell the people who hold their chains that the Second Amendment is not about the freedom to own antiques or sporting arms."[/red]

Piazza closes with this: "What the hell is the NRA thinking? Can somebody answer that question? In the answer we will find the reason why we are losing out gun rights."


[/b]

In closing fly, that city boycott I mentioned in my "user info"?? NRA refused to support it!!!....... GOA, SAF,(second amendment foundation), and JPFO, all lined up in support, and we won the first victory of it's kind in the state of Oregon....(but then I'm just "a horses ass" who has run a sucessful pro-gun boycott against a major tourist destination in Oregon)

Quoted:


Why do I doubt that? ....



I wouldn't piss down their throat if their heart was on fire...they helped ban my guns.


   

ya, but it ain't the guy I'm responding to...

   

yer right, it hasn't done shit for me, except help the anti-gunners.

   

No....

Quoted:
Ok...OK!  You can sqwawk back and forth about the NRA all you want, but let's keep the
personalities out of the discussion from here on out.
No need of it.