What's new
By:

NRA uses Justice memo to accuse Obama admin of wanting to confiscate guns

Red James Cash

Red James Cash

Banned
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
12,824
Reaction score
7,901
Golden Thread
0
Location
New Hampshire
Detector(s) used
Garret Master hunter Cx Plus
Primary Interest:
Other
And the wash times is certainly no left wing rag.
 

0121stockpicker said:
And the wash times is certainly no left wing rag.
Click to expand...
So, for the sake of argument, let's say the NRA lied. Why?....Because the Obama administration is talking about gun control. If they weren't talking about gun control why is all this necessary? The entire controversy we are currently going through is due to one teeny, tiny, little fact...The government is talking about, in one form or another, and taking steps to, limit our constitutional RIGHTS...it is that simple. If they would drop the whole thing, the controversy would instantly stop. They have control of the issue...shut-up, and it all goes away.
Jim
 

Jim, one word - money. Just look at this chat boats and everyone screaming to join the NRA and go out and buy guns and ammo. Controversy equals dues and donations. Tell people their guns will be banned and confiscated and you mobilize a base. I don't blame them at all. This is marketing 101 pure and simple - and it's working like a charm!! You know how much the NRA execs pull down each year??
 

Jim in Idaho said:
So, for the sake of argument, let's say the NRA lied. Why?....Because the Obama administration is talking about gun control. If they weren't talking about gun control why is all this necessary? The entire controversy we are currently going through is due to one teeny, tiny, little fact...The government is talking about, in one form or another, and taking steps to, limit our constitutional RIGHTS...it is that simple. If they would drop the whole thing, the controversy would instantly stop. They have control of the issue...shut-up, and it all goes away.
Jim
Click to expand...

Putting limitations on gun ownership - completely constitutional. Even the NRA knows that - see quote.

The NRA’s David Keene responded to the decision with the organization’s standard middle-of-the-road defense of the Second Amendment and the Bill of Rights.

“One of the things that people in these town meetings and other folks ought to look at is the constitution itself. It is possible and it is legal to put certain restrictions on second amendment rights,” he said, “but those kinds of restrictions have to be looked at very critically.”
 

0121stockpicker said:
Jim, one word - money. Just look at this chat boats and everyone screaming to join the NRA and go out and buy guns and ammo. Controversy equals dues and donations. Tell people their guns will be banned and confiscated and you mobilize a base. I don't blame them at all. This is marketing 101 pure and simple - and it's working like a charm!! You know how much the NRA execs pull down each year??
Click to expand...
Do you REALLY think Obama and his ilk care about increasing dues to the NRA????. I sure hope you don't. None of this stuff started until the Dems knee-kerk reaction to what happened in Connecticut. This all about new laws being proposed by Dems, at the Federal and state level..it's that simple. All that needs to be done to put a halt to all of this is for the Dems to stop introducing new gun control bills. Just stop, that's it. Simple. But, they won't because they want them all, and Connecticut was a great excuse for firing it all up again. And, I don't care what the execs pull down...I believe in capitalism. They can have what they can get. At least with them, you have a choice to contribute, or not. Same with private corporations....don't like 'em? don't buy what they sell. Try doing that with the government when they come to take your money. Good luck with that.
Jim
 

0121stockpicker said:
Putting limitations on gun ownership - completely constitutional. Even the NRA knows that - see quote.

The NRA’s David Keene responded to the decision with the organization’s standard middle-of-the-road defense of the Second Amendment and the Bill of Rights.

“One of the things that people in these town meetings and other folks ought to look at is the constitution itself. It is possible and it is legal to put certain restrictions on second amendment rights,” he said, “but those kinds of restrictions have to be looked at very critically.”
Click to expand...
It isn't important what the NRA believes. What's important is what the constitution says. Who cares what the NRA says? They aren't the law. They're simply a lobbying organization for many gun owners in America. At the time the Constitution was written, the people had the same weapons as the government. If it wasn't intended that way, why didn't the founding fathers insist that the people be restricted to spears?, or bows and arrows? The founders knew that the biggest danger to the people's freedom was their own government....and with good reason.
Jim
 

Your exactly right only the constitution matters. And the constitution lays out a crystal clear legal path to place restrictions and limitations on gun ownership. This is just factual truth. But since I doubt any "true believer" is going to take the time to learn constitutional law or civics 101 I figured you might as well hear it from the horses mouth. Bottom line - no one is looking to ban or confiscate anyone's guns, but it is perfectly constitutionally legal to place limitations and restrictions as has been done for decades and decades. Best.
 

"The founders knew that the biggest danger to the people's freedom was their own government....and with good reason.
Jim"

Why?...Because they were in it? lol. :)
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight?

⬅️ Previous Thread

NRAs Armed Citizen Grandfather

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Metal Detecting Stuff

Latest Discussions

Back
Top