Skip to main content

National Rifle Association logo
The National Rifle Association is a scam. Pure and simple. There's no larger message there, there's no nuance you need to parse out, nothing: They exist solely to promote the views and goals of the gun manufacturers themselves, and that means they exist solely to sell guns. And if that means blocking action meant to restrict international black market access of guns to drug cartels, the sex slavery industry, child armies, enablers of genocide and good old fashioned murdering dictators, then you can bet your ass they will have a breathless story in their official magazine about how those efforts at trying to keep guns out of the hands of drug cartels, child armies, genocide-enablers and all the rest is just a secret plot against you, damn every bit of logic and evidence to the contrary, and gun manufacturers need to be able to have their products sold freely on the black market to those worst-of-the-worst groups because freedom.
The latest cover story from the National Rifle Association magazine America's 1st Freedom pushes a baseless conspiracy  that a proposed United Nations treaty to prevent the diversion of weapons to human rights abusers will be used by "the minions of tyrannical and thieving governments" to achieve "total disarmament of freedom-loving people all over the world."

In reality, the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) seeks to address the fact that as many as 500,000 people are killed in armed violence each year worldwide by implementing -- on an international scale -- arms trade standards that are already used in the United States.

It's a scam. The author of the article himself knows full well that the premise of the U.N. coming to take your guns is hogwash, and has to jump through a great many hoops to make it sound like something that even could possibly happen someday because of slippery slopes, Obama-appointed judges and the lonely isolation of other countries just plain not having as many guns as we do (which is a bad thing, to the NRA. Just wanted to make that clear). The proposed treaty in question is meant to help codify some minimal international standards for curtailing black market weapon sales to organized crime, to terrorists, and to other violent groups. As with the recently scuttled U.N. treaty on countries maybe not treating disabled people like crap, it's largely based on existing United States policies in the first place, meaning Joe and Jane Six-Shooter don't have one damn thing to worry about unless they've got a side business selling black market guns to child sex traffickers or the like.

Like every single other position taken in recent memory by the NRA, however, the NRA comes down quite happily on the side of selling more guns, all guns, all the time, with no possible tightening of international standards ever because that would be a slippery slope to something-something indoctrination camps or what-the-fuck-ever—even when, in this case, if it means siding against efforts explicitly aimed at not selling guns to terrorist groups, drug cartels and roving genocidal gangs. Oh, and then you'll get a new op-ed written by the same NRA voices on how those same armed-to-the-teeth drug cartels and roving genocidal gangs are coming to your neighborhood anytime now, so you need to buy better guns as well. Assault rifles at minimum. You know—to defend yourself, you hapless sucker, you.

There's only one way to interpret any of it, and that is that the NRA exists only as a shell for the small arms industry to promote and sell as much of their product as possible, without regulation, and to whatever groups of crooks and criminals wants to pay good cash money for them. When you can't even agree that maybe the world shouldn't be so easily selling guns to goddamn child armies, you are a soulless fucker who really ought to be dropped off on the Somali coastline and left to fend for your goddamn self without the rest of us bothering to interfere anymore.

Rant over. And at this point, everyone knows full well how unhinged, dishonest, and outright corrupt the NRA is, so anyone who gives them so much as a wayward fleck of spit by way of respect should be considered just as corrupt as they are. Once you've come out against even weak attempts to not sell guns to the purveyors of genocide, you are done.

Email or call your senators to ask that they pass President Obama’s gun safety proposals.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:30 PM PST.

Also republished by Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment (RASA) and Shut Down the NRA.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  In an industry-sponsored, single-issue outfit (14+ / 0-)

    ... like the NRA, what's the percentage in being the slightest bit reasonable?

    Look who the NRA is accountable to.

    2014 IS COMING. Build up the Senate. Win back the House : 17 seats. Plus!

    by TRPChicago on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:39:28 PM PST

  •  Soulless Fuckers (16+ / 0-)

    Poetry - pure poetry

    And, Yep - totally agree.

    Democracy, if done properly, is rude, messy, and loud

    by allensl on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:39:39 PM PST

  •  NRA is the champion of ignorance too (23+ / 0-)

    The NRA can state that none of the proposed control measures work because they successfully lobbied for research funding on these issues to be eliminated. The NRA has promoted ignorance of these issues so they could spen forth with propaganda.
        The absence of proof of a causal association is not the same as then stating that you have proven that such association is absent.
        Ignorance is not bliss

  •  There is no reason we cannot succeed with (11+ / 0-)

    Universal Background Checks. I would like the NRA to focus on less likely issues, while we get that one thing done.

    I know many want bans on Assault Weapons, but I really don't believe that is nearly as important as the background checks--which enjoys huge approval anyway.

    I cannot imagine what it would feel like to agree with the NRA that one should be able to sell guns to terrorists, murderers, criminals, and domestic abusers without a background check. Indeed, I am inclined to think that nobody thinks that, unless they have been fooled by the gun lobby somehow: no sane person could defend the NRA.

    “liberals are the people who think that cruelty is the worst thing that we do” --Richard Rorty Also, I moved from NYC, so my username is inaccurate.

    by jeff in nyc on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:45:09 PM PST

    •  Actually, there IS a flaw in the background check (5+ / 0-)

      idea, that is, background checks are already required with new purchases from gun dealers but not in private sales.
      How do you track compliance in private sales if there is no registration of guns, no transfer of ownership logged with any authority?
      If there's no record of who owns which gun, there's no proof that this person bought it from that one.
      That doesn't mean we shouldn't push for Universal BC, but it's only part of the solution.
      Universal registration of all firearms, with something akin to the title of a car, that has to be transferred, denoting ownership, is a necessary piece for UBC and for an AWB (again, no record of the gun means no record of who sold it top whom, when).
      It would also put a clamp on straw buyers.

      If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

      by CwV on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:27:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, you are wrong. We can UBC without (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        any registration, and I have no idea how you can claim otherwise, so I'll let you explain.

        “liberals are the people who think that cruelty is the worst thing that we do” --Richard Rorty Also, I moved from NYC, so my username is inaccurate.

        by jeff in nyc on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:31:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Please explain how it can work without (0+ / 0-)

          I explained how I see it can be avoided.

          If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

          by CwV on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:35:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The gun is not what is checked: the buyer (0+ / 0-)

            is checked. It may ALSO be true that a gun may be put through the system, but the Background Check is on the Buyer, not the gun.

            “liberals are the people who think that cruelty is the worst thing that we do” --Richard Rorty Also, I moved from NYC, so my username is inaccurate.

            by jeff in nyc on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:37:12 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  But if a gun is sold privately (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              there is no record that there is a transaction, so there is nothing that makes either buyer or seller submit to the background check and no authority is the wiser because there's no record of the sale. One or the other of them would have to voluntarily invoke the background check.
              That'll happen the same day they tell the State that $2000 changed hands for that gun and by the way, here's the sales tax from the buyer and the income tax from the seller.

              If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

              by CwV on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:45:48 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  ? ? ? dude I don't know what to tell you. That's (0+ / 0-)

                what the debate is about.

                “liberals are the people who think that cruelty is the worst thing that we do” --Richard Rorty Also, I moved from NYC, so my username is inaccurate.

                by jeff in nyc on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:47:13 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  SO you are saying that private sellers WILL (0+ / 0-)

                  run background checks? Voluntarily?
                  What's their motivation?

                  If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

                  by CwV on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:51:08 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Look, you haven't done any reading at all (0+ / 0-)

                    about the issue, so I'm not continuing this discussion. We want to stop the loophole that allows those sales. The motivation is, you will go to jail if you don't do it. I am done with you.

                    “liberals are the people who think that cruelty is the worst thing that we do” --Richard Rorty Also, I moved from NYC, so my username is inaccurate.

                    by jeff in nyc on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:54:32 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

              •  Look: if you illegally sell anything, there is (0+ / 0-)

                no record, and there is no background check. I am talking about legally selling guns. You realize that you can break the law without reporting your activity to the police, right?

                “liberals are the people who think that cruelty is the worst thing that we do” --Richard Rorty Also, I moved from NYC, so my username is inaccurate.

                by jeff in nyc on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:49:45 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Private sales are legal (0+ / 0-)

                  That IS the gunshow loophole.
                  Are you saying make all private sales illegal? All guns have to be sold only by licensed dealers? Because that's a MUCH bigger fight than UBC.

                  If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

                  by CwV on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:56:17 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  For purposes of self preservation, (0+ / 0-)

                I have never sold a firearm privately without having both myself and the buyer fill out and sign transfer documents.  No, the documents don't go to a government agency, but they sure as heck end up in my safe deposit box, just in case the buyer or some future buyer (or thief) commits a crime with the weapon.  It's basically the same form I use when selling a vehicle, above and beyond filling out the stub at the bottom of the title for the DMV, and for the same reason -- self protection and proof of non-ownership in case of later mishap.  

                A seller of any potentially dangerous item would be a fool to not keep a dated, verifiable record of the transfer.

                That said, I support the idea of background checks, much as we have today when buying from dealers, with added access to mental health records for those doing the checking.  That, much more so than restricting types of firearms, would reduce the number of mass shootings in this country.  How to allow the DHS/ATF idiots access to mental health records without serious privacy violations is another issue I haven't very thoroughly thought through yet.

                Still, a large portion of the mass shootings of late have involved shooters who have demonstrated repeated signs of instability prior to the tragedies.  In some cases, such at Ft. Hood, the government very badly failed to follow up on early warnings; in others, such as Aurora, mental health professionals dropped the ball.  In Newtown, the mother messed up by allowing the kid access to her weapons, obviously, and it makes me wonder if part of a background check should involve asking whether a buyer has any mentally ill persons living in his or her home.  That, again, may involve privacy violations.  It's not going to be an easy fix, no matter how we approach it.

                One thing is certain, and that is that hyperbole will fix nothing, no matter who is hypering the bole.  

                The wisdom of my forebears ... Two wise people will never agree. Man begins in dust and ends in dust — meanwhile it's good to drink some vodka. A man studies until he's seventy and dies a fool. Some of my best friends are Catholics, really.

                by Not A Bot on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 09:17:15 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Also have to make buyers responsible for their gun (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Not A Bot

                  To many straw buyers getting guns for people that are not supposed to have them. If I buy a gun and give it to my brother Joe, and he loses it, but doesn't tell me. Someone finds it and shoots someone..... well the gun gets traced back to you... so you are responsible. You should not give your guns to your brother. Hope you get the drift of this...

              •  There can be no private sales .... (0+ / 0-)

                I have a old gun, you want to buy it, we run down to the gun shop and they run a check, we pay $5 and then you can buy my old gun.
                Got to have a gun database.

        •  Who will monitor these private sales and make sure (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          background checks are conducted?

          •  No one. (0+ / 0-)

            jeff in NYC seems to be saying that there should be no private sales. I assume that means if you have a gun you don't want any more, either you are stuck with it or you can sell it to a dealer. I can't see that working out, the guns will simply be sold illegally since there's no way to tell who owns what.
            And Not A Bot is saying that he requires a bill of sale on guns he sells, for his own protection in case the gun is used in a crime.
            Question: How would anyone know that a gun you sold, that maybe was sold again, was used in a crime, ever belonged to you in the first place? Unless you bought it from a dealer who had a list of customers and serial numbers of the guns he'd sold to them and gave that list to BATF, there's no way to trace the provenance of guns.
            Without registration, there is no control.

            If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

            by CwV on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 04:46:01 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Home invasions by unspeakably (5+ / 0-)

    evil violent rapists or killers, those terrorists who  are gonna kill yer family, and protection from all teh evils out to get you in this world and then some are a staple of the fear pumped out daily to Americans. What fucking cowards are who lose all rational proportion of the danger that they cook up or the government cooks up to justify lethal force for anything that may or may not kill you or even have the nerve to threaten your paranoid insanity.  

  •  It was true in 1980 and it's true now. (3+ / 0-)

    Tracy B Ann - technically that is my signature.

    by ZenTrainer on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:46:37 PM PST

  •  The NRA clearly does not care about rights, the 2A (8+ / 0-)

    or about any of its members - they only care about the $ signs that the gun manufacturers get and then kick back to them.  Sadly, the gun Cult they created is truly an unhinged bunch that will not even admit that we have a clear and BIG gun violence problem (what else would you call it when a person gets shot every 5 freaking minutes?) and they always try to deny the reality, de-humanize/discount the victims, and repeat NRA talking points.

    They are as militant as any religious freak and even more outrageous about insisting that the victims don't count, that nothing that is tried will ever save a single shooting victim, and - finally - that firearm regulations (licensing, registration, full background checks, etc.) are only a prelude to CONFISCATING ALL THEIR GUNS!

    This gun Cult may have only been created as a way for the NRA to sell more hardware, but they are unhinged now and they are ready to destroy anyone that gets in the way of their sacred 27-Word Gospel/Constitution.  Sadly many innocent victims are paying and will continue to pay.

    Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

    by DefendOurConstitution on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:50:48 PM PST

  •  NRA = Domestic Terrorists (3+ / 0-)

    "Political ends as sad remains will die." - YES 'And You and I' ; -8.88, -9.54

    by US Blues on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:54:12 PM PST

    •  An umbrella organisation for paramilitary militias (6+ / 0-)

      Right-wing paramilitary militias. Feels like Somalia, Uganda, Congo, or Iran, but not the US. You would think that a member revolt should isolate the extremist leadership, but we don't see this yet. Maybe the only way out is to start a campaign for normal gun owners and hunters to exit the organization. An isolated organization of right-wingers and government haters may indeed end up on the list of terrorist organizations. They certainly brought more terror to American cities and neighborhoods than any foreign terrorist organization.

    •  We should fight overuse of the word "terrorist" (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Not A Bot, annieli

      Calling opponents "terrorists" is a right-wing trick.

      Freedom isn't free. Patriots pay taxes.

      by Dogs are fuzzy on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:23:06 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Rational discussion will get us better results (0+ / 0-)

        than any amount of name calling -- and by "us" I mean Americans collectively, right and left alike.  Both sides could learn and benefit from your advice, Dogs Are Fuzzy.

        The wisdom of my forebears ... Two wise people will never agree. Man begins in dust and ends in dust — meanwhile it's good to drink some vodka. A man studies until he's seventy and dies a fool. Some of my best friends are Catholics, really.

        by Not A Bot on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 09:21:53 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  They are Domestic Terrorists. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Panama Pete

      The number of gun-deaths---and gun-related injuries---on a daily basis in this country---makes guns the number 1 public health-crisis in this country.

      Mayan Word For 'Apocalypse' Actually Translates More Accurately As "Time Of Pale Obese Gun Monsters."......the Onion

      by lyvwyr101 on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 07:13:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  WHAT Obama-appointed judges? (5+ / 0-)

    Have the fascists approved any nominees?

    "There's no ideology [t]here [on the right]. It's just about being a dick." Bill Maher, June 22, 2012.

    by caseynm on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:54:59 PM PST

  •  They're Repeating What They Did in 2009 and (5+ / 0-)

    we're repeating our guffawing response of 2009.

    Then in 2010 they massacred us in the tea party wave because midterm elections are base-heavy not sane people elections.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:58:59 PM PST

  •  Rec'd for this line (3+ / 0-)
    When you can't even agree that maybe the world shouldn't be so easily selling guns to goddamn child armies, you are a soulless fucker who really ought to be dropped off on the Somali coastline and left to fend for your goddamn self without the rest of us bothering to interfere anymore.
    They can have 1 AR-15 and 2 30-round box clips. And it could be made into a reality show with the winner (the last one killed) getting a bullet named after them and a signed photo of Oscar Pistorius with a big wreath at the funeral.

    See the children of the earth who wake to find the table bare, See the gentry in the country riding out to take the air. ~~Gordon Lightfoot, "Don Quixote"

    by Panama Pete on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:01:07 PM PST

  •  If I read the book correctly (11+ / 0-)

    First there's the total disarmament of freedom-loving people all over the world.

    Then we get the one-world government.

    And then Jesus comes back.

    So you mean they don't want Jesus to come back?

    If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low... oh you oughta see it sometime. It's a sight. A big plane like a '52... varrrooom! Its jet exhaust... frying chickens in the barnyard!

    by Major Kong on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:01:35 PM PST

  •  I've been told that the average American gun owner (6+ / 0-)

    has seven firearms.
    (I actually have a .22 semiauto, but not time or inclination to go out and kill anything with it except for some tin cans.)

    If I were a hunter and shooting-sports enthusiast, I suppose I would need:
    One fancy shotgun for skeet, or other competitive shooting,
    one .12 gauge shotgun for ducks and upland game birds,
    one deer rifle, probably in .30 caliber,
    and one.22 semiauto for plinking and varmints.

    The list is up to four and I'm out of sensible reasons to own a particular firearm.

    If a woman has seven cats, you might think she's a bit strange. If a man has seven guns, he's a serious collector.

    I started with nothing and still have most of it left. - Seasick Steve

    by ruleoflaw on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:03:22 PM PST

    •  also the gun your dad got in the war (7+ / 0-)

      and the double your grandpa got back in 1923 that can't be used any more because it only shoots lead.

      And don't forget a flat shooter small diameter for when you want to reach way on out there for varmints, like a 223 or a 22-50

      Some like to use something with more oomph for elk and moose.

      Don't forget a real 22, you know with a bolt, because semi autos jam and aren't so accurate but you didn't know that when you bought it, and it's best to practice with an action and  scope similar to what you shoot game with.

      We're up to 9 and I haven't even mentioned any sort of handgun because I don't like them. But others might.

      Someone who is a little bit more into hunting might have more guns. One doesn't have to be knuckle dragger to own firearms.

      How big is your personal carbon footprint?

      by ban nock on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:20:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Have a .22 as well (5+ / 0-)

      Locked up somewhere; those who think hitting a target as a sport can do as well with that as any other firearm. Those who think they need enough fire power to fight off the Seventh Legion or its modern equivalent think they need more.

      And my husband has a "collection"--one from a grandfather, one from an uncle. Don't classify people who collect as nuts.

      Your list above? Hard to find a place any more where you can shoot deer without hitting a camper or getting something with bovine TB, but to each his/her own.

      This is NOT about guns. This great diary is absolutely correct. The NRA is a smoke screen for some seriously evil money boys.

  •  NRA is so UN-American (3+ / 0-)

    Like some evil snarling thing in a film noir.

    But the mask seems to have slipped.

    Biden is right, things have changed!

    Thanks for the great rant.

    We can safely abandon the doctrine of the eighties, namely that the rich were not working because they had too little money, the poor because they had too much. JK Galbraith, 1991

    by Urban Owl on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:03:22 PM PST

  •  The real problem is not the NRA. (11+ / 0-)

    just as the real problem with Republicans is not the Teabaggers.

    The real problem is the so called reasonable gun owners who are all keeping their heads down at the moment silently offering a prayer to the NRA for taking the heat on this issue.

    Don't get me wrong, the NRA are loathsome but they would be out of commission within the day if it wasn't for the tacit support of the so called responsible gun owners.

  •  Continuing the analogy (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DefendOurConstitution, lyvwyr101

    Would that make gun merchants, Johns and folks like Charleton Heston, pimps?

    "Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed." General Buck Turgidson

    by muledriver on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:05:25 PM PST

  •  Read the answers to my comments, they are (8+ / 0-)

    here, they know me, they hate me.  I won't stop talking about kindergarteners.

    guns are fun v. hey buddy, watch what you are doing -- which side are you on?

    by 88kathy on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:08:02 PM PST

  •  When a new Senator or Representative (7+ / 0-)

    is elected, what are the terms that the NRA offer?
    They are bullies, as is Grover Norquist, right?

    Has anyone ever related how their transaction is conducted?
    Any turncoats ever survive?

    This month, with the help of Kos, and especially Mayor Bloomberg's PAC, we may see the first major challenge to a directly endorsed NRA candidate!

    In IL-02, in the contest to replace Jesse Jackson, Debbie Halvorson has had to double down in a region wrought with rampant murder and death to innocent citizens. Mostly gangs and drugs. The NRA is blessing Halvorson and she is whistling their tune. In a lower profile way this time, NRA knows the significance of losing a well-publicized battle.

    Robin Kelly is a frontrunner in an 11-way race. The primary is this Tuesday, Feb 26.
    Kick a buck.

    Honesty is not a policy. It's a character trait.

    by Says Who on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:10:35 PM PST

  •  You know that in my blue state where people poll (5+ / 0-)

    to restrict magazines and "assault" weapons, they also poll support for the NRA at 56% versus 30% who poll that they dont' support the NRA?

    I think a lot of your commentary is kind of strong.

    anyone who gives them so much as a wayward fleck of spit by way of respect should be considered just as corrupt as they are
    I mean seriously, we elected two Dem senators, a Dem governor, and majorities in both sides of our legislature, and we are looking to have some very strong gun control laws. I don't think that my fellow Coloradans are corrupt and supporting the child sex trafficking trade etc etc etc.

    How big is your personal carbon footprint?

    by ban nock on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:29:49 PM PST

  •  We need to think of the NRA diffrently... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lyvwyr101, oldpunk

    Look at Feldman's book:

    It tells, from what I gather a less than faltering picture of the organization and how far its fallen.  

    I plan to buy the book.  

    Under capitalism man exploits man, under communism the roles are reversed.

    by DavidMS on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 08:55:05 PM PST

  •  Ya know...I started to read this... (6+ / 0-)

    Then I thought, who authored this? Because no one does a better rant (with few exceptions) than Hunter when it comes to my own mind set. And sure enough I scrolled back to the top and smiled.

    It's all about the money when it comes to guns. Pure and simple. The nonsense that is being spewed these days is outright disgusting. Even more disgusting? The folks that lap this shit up and believe it. Wayne Lapierre or however you spell this sick fucks name should be tried for crimes against humanity along with any other NRA mouth piece.

    The paranoia and delusion these guys feed goes beyond rational. And the folks that buy it are only one step lower than these purveyors of death.

    This is America! Right? The greatest country in the world for Pete's sake! (intentional snark for those not paying attention). Do people really believe that the government is going to go door to door and take your legally purchased and registered fire arms just because, you know, they know you have them? Apparently they do.

    This is America! This country is supposed to stand for something and be a beacon to the rest of the world. Right about now we are being laughed at by other civilized nations for all of the ineptitude on display. From our cowardly politicians who refuse to vote their conscience for fear of losing their jobs (influx of donor cash, fuck their constituents) to the lunacy of our seriously mentally ill populace that thinks guns are the savior machine. By golly we'll take this country back from someone somewhere! So long as I got me 38 different types of guns guns guns and my stockpile of ammunition!

    Your right to buy guns is not going to be diminished by a few sensible laws. But but but...assault style rifles! What's next? Oh that slippery (imaginary) slope.

    Men with religious beliefs have killed more people than any god that they have created...

    by Mislead on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 09:01:33 PM PST

  •  For whatever evil the NRA represents, (7+ / 0-)

    they are a mirror to our culture. We wouldn't be having this discussion if America wasn't so in love with their guns, and it has always been so, more than any other culture I can think of.

    Gun violence is deeply embedded in the history and soul of this country. When I was a young child in the fifties and early sixties, westerns were the TV fad of the times---stories that flat out celebrated the power of guns as resolution tools.

    Shit, by the time I was 10 I'd probably seen over a thousand people die of gun shots on TV series, and this was considered good wholesome entertainment. The little boys I grew up with were all sporting holsters and toy guns after every Christmas and birthday party.  

    And that's just my personal experience, but it goes back much longer and deeper than that.  Perhaps it was the size and incredible wild girth of the America that needed to be settled.  Perhaps it was that this country was born in a bloody battle, which our national anthem attests too.  Perhaps it is some wild alchemy of the American spirit one can't quite quantify.

    I really do hope and pray that Newtown changed things, and I think it did.  The question is will it change things enough.  And I guess I write all this to say that the NRA is only part of the problem, and imo, not the hardest part of the problem.

    Gun violence is systemic throughout our history and culture, and it's going to take a lot of fight to turn that around. We are imo, in the beginning of all that, and when and if we're ever successful, the NRA will shrivel or change.  

    The power is ours, we just have to want it bad enough. And that means fasten your seat belts for a long hard battle.

    "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

    by StellaRay on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 09:10:06 PM PST

    •  My guess is Obama won't abandon it (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PsychoSavannah, S F Hippie, StellaRay

      He'll only get background checks this time around. If we really work at it and take back the house, maybe limits on trafficking and huge clips. But changing the culture will take his post-Presidency evangelism, and I think he'll do it.

    •  Native American. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      snowwoman, StellaRay

      The country was born in bloodshed---and in many ways----still enjoys a blood flow.

      History as a nation is filled with it.

      Mayan Word For 'Apocalypse' Actually Translates More Accurately As "Time Of Pale Obese Gun Monsters."......the Onion

      by lyvwyr101 on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 07:48:19 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The NRA is the Fun House (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PsychoSavannah, StellaRay

      cultural mirror. I would hope that the current change in public opinion about controling the tools of rage and death will continue and reach something close to the rest of the worlds responsible nations.

      I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country. Thomas Jefferson

      by Sam Sara on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 09:41:39 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Which brings to mind (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sam Sara

        the whole "American exceptionalism" myth.  This is just one more area where we are unexceptional to the point of being neanderthals in comparison to more civilized countries.

        "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

        by StellaRay on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 10:37:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  People Who Love Freedom The Most (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Are criminals.

  •  Second Amendment is America's (4+ / 0-)

    "First Freedom?"

    Har har hardy har har.

    Thump! Bang. Whack-boing. It's dub!

    by dadadata on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 04:25:51 AM PST

  •  I am a proud NRA member. (0+ / 0-)

    I appreciate that there is a group dedicated to protecting my right to defend myself, as well as the rights of my progeny to do the same as they come of age.

    I wish many of my fellow liberals didn't feel compelled to do to the second amendment what the conservatives (with liberal acquiescence) did to the fourth in the aftermath of 9/11: use a wave of fear-driven emotion and irrationality to attack personal freedoms.

    I suppose I will have to be content with acknowledging the increasingly agitated rantings of gun banners; while distasteful and anti-logical, they at least demonstrate the depths of despair that enemies of the second amendment find themselves in at this point in time.

    •  Emotion precludes credibility? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      One of the more bizarre NRA talking points is that anguish or grief over gun violence disqualifies me from participating in a conversation on gun control ("fear-driven emotion").

      Following the same train of logic, the American people would have been disqualified from waging war against our enemies after 9/11, because there was an element - an overwhelming element - of emotion.  It's absurd and it's also a very clean parallel to what your organization wants us to believe about who can and who can't talk about gun control.

      I own many firearms.  And because I do, I feel compelled to go relentlessly point out to non-gun owners how radically out of step the NRA is with the great body of American gun owners, and even its own membership.

      •  And following that farther, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        it means that people who fear the Government, the home invaders, the spooks and their own shadow, should be disqualified from the discussion as well.
        Paranoia is a mental illness and it is on display from one end to the other of the Gun Owners community. Granted, it's drummed up and aggravated by professionals: NRA, et cetera, but the underlying drive behind almost every pro-gun proliferation argument is fear, blind, unreasoning terror.

        If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

        by CwV on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 10:40:32 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I wouldn't be so smug (0+ / 0-)

          Not everyone lives in a gated residential with armed security guards.  I have a good friend who was able to defend herself and her young son against a home invasion with a pistol; whether she would have been raped and/or murdered is a question we will thankfully never know the answer to as the perpetrator fled with no shots fired.

          That being said, perhaps you should re-read my post, this time for comprehension: I never said people with emotions should not have a voice, what I said was that we should not allow emotion to trump logic.

          Upon reflection, perhaps I am mistaken and you really understood the common meaning of average, everyday words on the English language; perhaps you ARE, in fact, arguing against using logic and our rational faculties to decide public policy.  If so, I apologize for overestimating your desire to have a rational and productive civil discourse on the right to keep and bear arms.

      •  When it trumps logic, yes. (0+ / 0-)

        I am not sure where you got the idea that anyone said having emotions disqualifies you from the debate-indeed, the only person here who is so intellectually dishonest as to disqualify someone from the debate without merit is Hunter, who is quite clear that he considers me and others like me to be corrupt (and presumably whores as well) because we disagree with him.

        To be blunt, if you let emotion dictate your position in contravention of logic then you are doing yourself and your country a disservice.  Let me elaborate: as you have probably heard, in 2011 exactly 323 people were killed with rifles.  That includes all kinds of rifles: lever action, bolt action, pump action, semiautomatics, single-shot, etc. and every caliber from .17 HMR to (presumably) .68 caliber black powder muskets.  So called "assault weapons" (if you are truly a gun owner then you know they are simply semiautomatic rifles with cosmetic styling features) represent some fraction of that.  The number who were killed by drunk drivers is higher than that by more than an order of magnitude: more than 9,500 in that same year.  Looking at it another way, about 27 people are murdered by drunk drivers every day.  That's a Sandy Hook a day, every day, 365 days a year, whereas 'assault weapons' kill some fraction of less than a person per day.  If gun banners weren't trying to ride a wave of fear-based emotionality, why wouldn't they support mandatory breathalyzer lockouts and a ban on standard capacity transportation?  I'd like to remind you that both firearms and automobiles are regulated at the state level, although only ownership and operation of only one of these is a natural right guaranteed as a civil right by our Constitution.

        Hell, just look statistics for firearms alone and you will quickly realize that most deaths occur due to handguns, and the handguns most commonly used by criminals are old or cheap small pistols with low ammo capacity.  While I would still fight against a 'Saturday Night Special' ban, I would at least be able to hold some measure of respect for the authors of such a bill for being honest and forthright, and for acting on actual data instead of playing with people's emotions.

        I'm not sure how old you are, but if you remember how fear and emotionality trumped logic in the 'war on terror' after 9/11, then you've seen this pattern before.  As for waging war against our enemies after 9/11, I would have hoped that a fellow liberal was at least informed enough not to have swallowed the lie that somehow Saddam Hussein was in league with Osama bin Laden which was used to channel understandable anger, fear, and anguish into a justification to invade Iraq.  Or do you still believe that there were WMDs?

        As far as being relentlessly out of step with most gun owners, I do not believe that is the case at all.  I myself agree in almost every instance with the NRA, although I would be willing to accept universal background checks provided that: 1) there was a robust mechanism for expunging data on those who pass the check after 60 days, 2) there is an equally robust attempt to prosecute ALL people who are denied a firearms because of a failed check, and 3) federal firearms legislation totally pre-empts state firearms legislation.

        I would also like to see some of my fellow liberals acknowledge that there are more than 2 million defensive gun uses in the average year; 2 million rapes, murders, assaults, or other violent crimes are prevented each year due to our right to keep and bear arms, but hold little hope of logic and facts trumping fear-based emotionality on this issue amongst my fellow Kossacks in general.

  •  great gun control joke from blawg (0+ / 0-)

    At the end of this long article,

    the blawg writes:

    * Buccaneers defensive end Da’Quan Bowers was arrested for trying to carry a gun onto an airplane. This wouldn’t have happened if Bowers had a gun.
    read it twice! :-)

    "Your victory has demonstrated that no person anywhere in the world should not dare to dream of wanting to change the world for a better place." -- Mandela

    by agoldnyc on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 08:20:25 AM PST

  •  Gun Control as a National Security Issue (0+ / 0-)

    I'm glad we're finally talking about not just the carnage American gun manufacturers are responsible for in America, but abroad as well.  We all know that Mexican drug violence is enabled in large part by porous borders and an abundance of easily-obtained, high-quality weaponry.  I doubt the problem stops with Mexico or even Central/South America.

    At what point does the American political cowardice in regulating firearms become a valid national security issue for our neighbors and allies?  It's definitely close.  And with increasing American military/intelligence engagement in Africa, won't it be awkward if it turns out that the chief supplier of weaponry to our enemies there is... us?

  •  This is what we were warned about. (0+ / 0-)

    As one of those liberal, commie, socialist scum who think the government's first duty is to protect its' citizens from harm, I remember that "liberal" president, Dwight Eisenhower, who warned us of the "Military Industrial Complex."

    The NRA is the leading public face of the MIC.  The rest of them all spend money on PBS sponsoring feel-good sciencey shows to cover their income from drones and torturing and excessive aircraft and ships.

    The NRA IS the front-line of the MIC to those members of the public too scared to piece together two rational thoughts.  They would have us all engaged in a full-time Hunger Games, everywhere, all the time, with more firepower sold by their masters and overlords.

    Wouldn't you PREFER to have to put on the bullet-proof vest and at least one easily reached weapon for each of your family members before going to the supermarket?  That's the NRA message.

    Just a soul on a roll...

    by CAOgdin on Sat Feb 23, 2013 at 10:18:53 AM PST

  •  Let's see the NRA get behind this: (0+ / 0-)

    The Magical Second Amendment Wormhole in the Gun Nut Continuum

    In which I discuss an argument I made recently that making me pay for my rightful gun, demanding money from me as a prerequisite condition of my keeping and bearing the specific Arms that I want, especially if it's more money than I'm able or willing to spend, violates my God-given right to have that weapon.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site