What's Wrong With the NRA?
Comments
-
@C_M_ said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
We constantly hear about the evils of the NRA from the crazy left. Can someone please spell out to me the wrongdoings of the NRA?N-- No one or Nothing else matters. No other point of views; No compromises; Naferious.
This is factually and demonstrably false.
R-- Remember the Second Amendment; Recalling of Guns.
What does that even mean?
A-- Arm everyone, especially teachers. Accuse the Democrats/alert the media" of the imminent appeal of the Second Amendment. "They are coming for our guns!"
Arm everyone especially teachers, what is wrong with arming teachers again? And yes, the Democrats and Anti-Gun lobbies are indeed coming for our guns.
In short, the NRA and 99% of its membership:
**1. Lack compassion
How so?
- Unsympathetic
How so?
- Closed minded**
One could say the same for the anti-gun lobby.
It's sad, we can't legislate heart and "common sense." Need I, say more? CM
Common sense according to who?
-
I hope this is not off topic. I'm presenting it as a solution to the entire NRA gun debate.
I notice some recent school construction of buildings designed similar to prisons, where you have a complete view of all corridors from one vantage point. This would no doubt help. Plus I think professionally trained police, not teachers, would help.
The teachers I know of are under too much stress and people should not try to save a few bucks expecting them to act in any way beyond teaching.
I believe this is true for churches as well. Forget the vigilanties, splurge and hire a few cops.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
Ok, so far I don't see what is wrong.Perhaps you didn't notice that I concluded the paragraph to which this is your response with these words "Had the NRA remained that kind of organization, I would not object to it today, and we'd have far more sensible gun laws in place"?
The point of my paragraph was to contend that in my view, there wasn't anything structurally "wrong" with the NRA in the time frame the paragraph summarized.
Still not seeing the problem.
Perhaps you didn't notice that I concluded the paragraph to which this is your response with these words "Had the NRA maintained such a reasonable approach to sensible, necessary gun laws - in the 60's, as a response to the Kennedy and King assassinations - I wouldn't object to it today, and we'd have far more sensible gun laws in place."?
The point of my paragraph was to contend that in my view, there wasn't a "problem" with the NRA in the time frame the paragraph summarized.
Still don't see the evil of the NRA here.
Perhaps you didn't notice that I concluded my previous post with a declaration that "evil" is not a label I attach to the NRA at all? To make that point, I wrote...
"I don't consider the NRA to be evil. I tend not to put people or the organizations they create on a "good" / "evil" continuum. But I do consider the NRA to be a threat to the security of our society as it stands in the way of needed gun law reforms. I'm praying and this year I hope will be working to elect people across the nation who will say no to the NRA, not because it's "evil," but because it's wrong."
/
This is flawed statistics as it does not take in other factors. That being said, you still had mass shootings with the AWB so it clearly didn't work that well or stop mass shootings.
What "factors"? Either there were X number of shootings over the given ten or twenty year period, or there weren't. Have you reviewed a list of mass shootings for the period the chart reports on? You can count the events and divide by the number of years in each period for yourself. Please show your work.
Your argument that the AWB "didn't work that well" because mass shootings still happened is hard to fathom. How many laws EVER eliminate the outcomes they ban? Do laws against speeding eliminate all speeding violations? Do laws against drunk driving eliminate all drunk driving? Do laws against robbing banks eliminate all bank robberies? Of course not. But the proper response is NOT to eliminate the laws! The usual response is to toughen the laws and the penalties associated with violating them.
The chart reports that the average number of mass shooting events per year went up 160% after the ban ended. Or put another way, that average number was more than 60% lower during the ban than it was after the ban ended. If a law reduced the annual average number of murders by 60% over a decade, I bet you'd call that law a success.
Yet that is how the founder's saw and envisioned the 2nd ammendment. You realize guns were everywhere in those days too right? That isn't the NRA's vision, it is the founders.
I don't feel qualified to comment on the founders' vision of guns in America. I suspect the 18th century vision they had for America could not have countenanced the changes we've experienced or the weapons of war we've created. Whatever their vision, I know I have disdain for a guns everywhere vision today. That's not the best America can be.
(And remember, our founders had a vision for the role of African Americans in society, too, a vision that today we reject as wrong. So simply because the founders MAY have wanted a chicken in every pot and a musket in every doorway doesn't mean we have to accept that vision.)
How is that garbage talk?
Re-read the whole of my post, David - particularly its opening paragraphs.
We have already proven that gun reform isn't the next logical step. This latest incident, as most incidents, could have been prevented without more gun control.
Since "gun reform isn't the next logical step," we can predict with high confidence that the next logical outcome will be more people killed in more mass shootings, and that the reaction from your side will be again, "Gun reform isn't the next logical step," which will lead to more people killed.....
-
@Bill_Coley said:
We have already proven that gun reform isn't the next logical step. This latest incident, as most incidents, could have been prevented without more gun control.
Since "gun reform isn't the next logical step," we can predict with high confidence that the next logical outcome will be more people killed in more mass shootings, and that the reaction from your side will be again, "Gun reform isn't the next logical step," which will lead to more people killed.....
Actually, I've talked about what would be common sense, but your side can't seem to grasp it or are unwilling to consider anything other than taking guns away. We offer solutions. For example, this tragedy could have and should have been prevented. But it wasn't because people dropped the ball, warning signs, PLAIN warning signs were missed.
