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.
What are you talking about? The NRA was instrumental in putting the NICS check (current background check system) into place. Which earned them a lot of grief from some on the right, btw.
They do not want background checks period, the proposal came from the Brady Group, they fought the legisdlation tooth and nail and finally relented. Did you hear a peep out of the NRAabout increasing background checks to cover private sales in the last few weeks.
Ever notice how domestic terrorists like to hide themselves amongst REAL Americans?
They wish the Constitution would go away and will help Obama and his band of misfits to make that happen.
Next thing you know, they will kick in your front door and demand money and food.
That's when they see all the firearms that WEREN'T taken away and registered.
Yeah, so you think Obama is a domestic terrorist, and this guy is a real American?
This is getting sick. I am ex-military and I actually was opposing a lot of gun control.
Now I see the absolute insanity of these "pro-gun" people and realize the people most in favor of limitless owning of any weapon are the ones that really shouldn't have these guns in the first place. They just don't want anyone looking at those that buying guns because no one in their right minds would let them own one.
Such as Alex Jones with his 50 guns, or this guy who thinks it is patriotic to go start randomly killing people whenever some one starts a process he doesn't agree with...like James Holmes.
Yeah, so you think Obama is a domestic terrorist, and this guy is a real American?
This is getting sick. I am ex-military and I actually was opposing a lot of gun control.
Now I see the absolute insanity of these "pro-gun" people and realize the people most in favor of limitless owning of any weapon are the ones that really shouldn't have these guns in the first place. They just don't want anyone looking at those that buying guns because no one in their right minds would let them own one.
Such as Alex Jones with his 50 guns, or this guy who thinks it is patriotic to go start randomly killing people whenever some one starts a process he doesn't agree with...like James Holmes.
They do not want background checks period, the proposal came from the Brady Group, they fought the legisdlation tooth and nail and finally relented. Did you hear a peep out of the NRAabout increasing background checks to cover private sales in the last few weeks.
No you are way off with your history. Why am I not surprised that you don't provide a link to support your claims.
Jim Baker of the NRA was quoted by USA Today on October 26, 1993 (P. 7A) as saying: " We already support 65% of the Brady bill, because it moves to an instant check, which is what we want."
Right now I can only guess that the NRA opposes banning private sales (which is basically what "universal background checks" would mean), because it would mean throwing out a whole lot of baby to get rid of a tiny amount of bath water. Since these mass shootings came into vogue, it has been exceedingly rare that any of them obtained gun thru gun shows or private sales. Why would we waste time solving a non-existent problem?
Gun control advocates have no argument that makes any sense, when subjected to any scrutiny. They merely howl, in fear and wail that unenforcable laws and unrealistic restrictions be placed on firearms owners.
It is not the bad guys they really want to hit, however. In their minds none of us should be able to own firearms, of any type. Theirs is an agenda of cramming tbeir own views down everybodies throat. That anyone would want a weapon, of any kind, is unthinkable to them and firearms scare them to death.
Where this contempt for those who choose to be proficient with arms so omes from, I know not. As I have said before, tbese are tbe same folks who advocate not resisting a violent attack. Rape and robbery at the top of their passiveness list. Resistance is futile, anx will cause tbe attacker to hurt you, hurt you worse or kill you. (Sigh) ...so we let it be known that the predator has totally passive prey? I would like one of you, who loathe the idea of bearing arms in defense of ones person to explain this rationale to me. That we should give tbe bad guys what they want, anx hope it will buy us our lives.
Tbe idea of civilian proficiency with arms and possesion of same is so repugnant to these people it leaves me slack. It's fi e by me if they would ratber be food than fight back. It's fine by me if they choose to disdain firearms ownership, for themselves, and feel no need to be armed. Just keep it out of my space. My reasons and need for weapons are my own. I need not justify myself to these people, nor do I feel any shame for not sharing their views.
If you can't distinguish the difference between using high capacity weapons against an unarmed population versus the effectiveness of those weapons against a modern military, then you are fraking dumber than I could ever imagine.
Oh I'm paying attention, it's funny watching the hypocrisy of the lefties come out when gun control comes up.
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.
