Why does society allow the NRA (gun manufacturers) do dictate? (employment, poll)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you don't have time for the whole article, note this:
Chris Cox, the executive director of the N.R.A.’s Institute for Legislative Action, took repeated aim at Hillary Clinton and told the crowd to “get over it” if their preferred candidate in the Republican primary had not won. The most important thing was to elect a pro-gun president in the coming election, one who would fight for the Second Amendment.
Keeping in mind that these days, the NRA is essentially just a promotional group for gun manufacturers, how can they have the nerve to suggest that your commitment to purchase their product should be your single most crucial issue - more important than, for instance, the economy, employment, civil rights, etc.? There is no other manufacturing group I can think of, not even Big Pharma, that would dare to suggest this.
If you don't have time for the whole article, note this:
Chris Cox, the executive director of the N.R.A.’s Institute for Legislative Action, took repeated aim at Hillary Clinton and told the crowd to “get over it” if their preferred candidate in the Republican primary had not won. The most important thing was to elect a pro-gun president in the coming election, one who would fight for the Second Amendment.
Keeping in mind that these days, the NRA is essentially just a promotional group for gun manufacturers, how can they have the nerve to suggest that your commitment to purchase their product should be your single most crucial issue - more important than, for instance, the economy, employment, civil rights, etc.? There is no other manufacturing group I can think of, not even Big Pharma, that would dare to suggest this.
Last time I looked (in the mirror), someone can be supportive of the 2nd Amendment and not be a gun-owner. And that same person can also believe that the protection of 2nd Amendment liberties is, in fact, a very important issue.
In terms of "buying their product"? Meh. It just so happens that "their product" (if one could really call it that) is inexorably linked to a fundamental right in the U.S. I can't think of another product that would even be close to comparable.
Finally, in terms of "having nerve" to suggest that one should think that an issue is the "most important one"? The NRA hardly corners the market on that presumptuousness.
Last time I looked (in the mirror), someone can be supportive of the 2nd Amendment and not be a gun-owner. And that same person can also believe that the protection of 2nd Amendment liberties is, in fact, a very important issue.
In terms of "buying their product"? Meh. It just so happens that "their product" (if one could really call it that) is inexorably linked to a fundamental right in the U.S. I can't think of another product that would even be close to comparable.
Finally, in terms of "having nerve" to suggest that one should think that an issue is the "most important one"? The NRA hardly corners the market on that presumptuousness.
That brings to mind another issue, also. I meant to post about this separately. At some point, someone campaigning had talked about our needing a candidate who "believes in the Second Amendment."
This was a jolt. For the most part everyone "believes" in the Second Amendment. I'm anti-gun, but I "believe" in the Second Amendment, too. It's just that I regard it differently from the way the NRA does, and, in fact, even the NRA's intrusion and interpretation is fairly recent, only in the last few decades.
Everybody thinks their issue should be the most important factor for everyone else. Be it gun protection/control or abortion rights/elimination or environmental protection/exploitation or labor/owner rights.
The NRA thinks the biggest issue should be about guns. No real surprise. With a supreme court vacancy and several very old justices combined with several very key cases heading toward SCOTUS right now (including how the 2A is interpreted regarding the right to carry a firearm in public), he is right to be concerned.
Incidentally, it isn't an either/or situation. Johnson is a viable candidate on the ballot in all 50 states, and he is neither a Trump nor a Clinton.
That brings to mind another issue, also. I meant to post about this separately. At some point, someone campaigning had talked about our needing a candidate who "believes in the Second Amendment."
This was a jolt. For the most part everyone "believes" in the Second Amendment..
Actually no, they don't. In fact there is no shortage of people who are enraged by it and would love nothing more than see it repealed. Those people are the very reason for the NRA's existence in the first place..
Quote:
I'm anti-gun, but I "believe" in the Second Amendment, too. It's just that I regard it differently from the way the NRA does, and, in fact, even the NRA's intrusion and interpretation is fairly recent, only in the last few decades
What intrusion??
You might not believe this, but I'm one of those Eeee-vil gun nuts that the liberals hate so much. Got a couple of pistols, and an AR-15 just to name a few. Yet for no particular reason at all I'm not a member of the NRA. They don't "intrude" on me at all... maybe someday I'll join, but until then I'm indifferent to it.
Strength of NRA is not in gun manufacturers, but in regular supporters who would refuse to vote for any politician rated by NRA as gun unfriendly. Negative NRA rating caused many politicians their seats and none of them want to leave...
Last time I looked (in the mirror), someone can be supportive of the 2nd Amendment and not be a gun-owner. And that same person can also believe that the protection of 2nd Amendment liberties is, in fact, a very important issue.
In terms of "buying their product"? Meh. It just so happens that "their product" (if one could really call it that) is inexorably linked to a fundamental right in the U.S. I can't think of another product that would even be close to comparable.
Finally, in terms of "having nerve" to suggest that one should think that an issue is the "most important one"? The NRA hardly corners the market on that presumptuousness.
Water. Food. Pharmaceuticals. Clothes. Building materials. Electricity. Entertainment. Medical services.
That's more than one, and they're not really comparable, it's true. I mean, all of them are far more important to be able to buy than guns. And all of them have the govt clamped down hard on manufacturers to make sure they're safe and accessible to residents.
The NRA is saying people should ignore the catastrophe Trump would be for the world and vote for him because guns. That's beyond presumptuous.
"Why does society allow the NRA (gun manufacturers) do dictate?"
I would say it's because there are enough members of society that agree with their philosophy.
Nope. From Gallup
Quote:
In the October poll, 86% of Americans favored "a law which would require universal background checks for all gun purchases in the U.S. using a centralized database across all 50 states." A recent Quinnipiac poll found 77% support for banning gun sales to those on terrorist watch lists
The NRA spends a huge amount of money funding relection campaigns for politicians. Those politicians need that money to keep their job so they do what the NRA tells them.
The NRA is a gun rights advocate that lobbies politicians and gives them ratings for their members will know who is gun friendly so they can vote accordingly.
The other night I was out with a die hard dem and the gun issue came up. He did admit that he went shooting once with a law enforcement officer and he had fun but he still would never consider owning a gun himself. He saw no reason why anyone should own a AR15 and I said target shooting.
The NRA doesn't specify from a small .22 caliber pocket handgun to a AR 15 type rifle to a .50 caliber sniper rifle. The NRA knows that if they and the public give an inch of concession that the Government will take a mile.
I do think that the NRA does take a hard stance but they are right to do so. We wouldn't have the first amendment without the second. Guns are an American heritage an American tradition and gun rights is a very hot topic.
As we saw in Nice France a truck can be used to kill. The auto industry is already highly regulated and they also have their own lobbyists that "dictate" to politicians.
The NRA and other groups like them are important to keep the Government in check else they would run rough shod all over us depending on which way the political winds were blowing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
