2fewdaysafield
Member
+ 1 for Michael Thomson
For all the rhetoric about leaving/not joining the NRA this is what I have to say: Do you leave your wife, girlfriend, children, parents, every time you disagree with them
If the NRA was a wife or girlfriend she would be sleeping around on you, spending all your money with nothing to show for it, and refusing to get a job. I would definitely leave that woman.
That is true, the only way we can hold them off until the next elections is in court and the NRA can do this.Can the NRA 'fight' the nomination? Not so much. Even if they scuttle Holder, there will always be one just like him or worse waiting in the wings.
I get that, but nothing to show for it Well, how about concealed carry laws, castle doctrine laws, guns-in-car laws, the defeat of Al Gore, the Thiart Amendment, the Federal law that was passed after Katrina dealing with confiscations, and gazillion of other gun rights (you can do your own research if you wish) that you are currently enjoying. "Nothing to show" for is a bit out of line, if you ask me.
Do you realize that each of these "rights" you are touting are nothing more than a few placations - exceptions to the underlying unconstitutional laws that make it "necessary" to have laws that allow you to carry a gun concealed or otherwise? Get that ? ALLOW. You were BORN with the right to carry a gun concealed, open, on your hat like an ornament, drug behind you like a sled, or one big enough that you and 5000 others can ride in/on it with you?
Very true and very important. This is real life in the real world -- where some things are possible and some things are not. If one doesn't recognize the difference, nothing will ever get done.camacho said:...but I also understand reality....
+1 -- I'll never understand why some folks think that all we have to do is dig in our heels and scream "no" as loudly as possible.camacho said:...you have the other organizations ... who just scream the sky is falling and no compromise, and have no single tangible accomplishment....
+1 -- I'll never understand why some folks think that all we have to do is dig in our heels and scream "no" as loudly as possible.
Which is why the NRA doesn't need the attorney general to have a grudge against them.The Attorney General position can create a lot of problems for gun-rights advocates over the next four years.
LOL!Because the NRA has helped erode your 2nd Amendment RIGHT all along, only you aren't willing to accept that you've been duped.
Will do!Name the restrictions on your 2nd Amendment rights that your beloved NRA have not "negotiated" for you.
It would just make them look bad and waste cash, meaning they'll have less influence when it's time to vote on revolver ban 2.0.Losing battle or not, sometimes you have to FIGHT even if you know you are going to lose just to make a point.
I would, but first I ahve a question: Does the GOA always attack the mostly pro-gun candidates, or just this year? If they're going to attack the most pro-gun of the electable cadidates, I personally feel that they are doing more harm than good, and would rather just donate to NRA-ILA. If we elect pro-gun politicians, we don't get gun bans. Or does it just depend on whether or not the candidate in question has a high enough GOA rating?Truth of the matter is, we need BOTH NRA and GOA. I urge everyone who is a member of only one to join both.
The president of the NRA also sent letters to some senators, saying why he was bad.NRA has also opposed Holder's confirmation, and strongly believes he will actively work to restrict gun owners' rights.
So, I wasn't the only oneOk, I got bored reading this thread when Ron Paul got mentioned.
"Shall not be infringed."
Period.
Tom Servo said:The plain fact is this: compromise and negotiation are essential elements of politics. Absolutes don't fly in the real world.
True, but I'd ask: what could the NRA have done? It's not an elected position, and as others have pointed out, even if they could somehow get the appointment blocked, Obama would just choose someone else who was just as "anti."Choosing not to oppose an appointment that amounts to the administration thumbing its nose at gun owners is not a compromise. Where was the negotiation? What did the gun owning community gain from its highest-profile advocate failing to oppose that appointment?