"Moms" to protest NRAHQ 10/6 10AM

[44man]

Apples and oranges. Rate of fire is at the heart of the NFA rules on machine guns.

You do sound like a "never give and inch guy." Believe me, I don't want to give an inch on anything because as a libertarian, I want the government to keep its filthy paws off of everything apart from national defense, interstate commerce, and a select few items. However, this to me is the least painful inch to give.

so you really do want to give an inch, you are willing to give them what they want? your a leftist compromiser? ok, now we know.

 

[knastera]

"Moms" to protest NRAHQ 10/6 10AM

You are a very sad name caller. Try to see the bigger picture. I think the NRA got this right. They were able to pin bump fire on Obama, and recommendation or not, the ATF was going to look into bump fire stocks. Why not win a battle in the propaganda war when it costs us almost nothing? All of the improvement features people mentioned are straw man arguments.
Again, I think that the vast majority of gun laws are unconstitutional. The war we have to win to keep our 2A rights has to see the bigger picture. The nation sees the NRA as the face of all gun owners. This is a public relations win.

 

[44man]

You are a very sad name caller. Try to see the bigger picture. I think the NRA got this right. They were able to pin bump fire on Obama, and recommendation or not, the ATF was going to look into bump fire stocks. Why not win a battle in the propaganda war when it costs us almost nothing? All of the improvement features people mentioned are straw man arguments.
Again, I think that the vast majority of gun laws are unconstitutional. The war we have to win to keep our 2A rights has to see the bigger picture. The nation sees the NRA as the face of all gun owners. This is a public relations win.

I used your words not mine

and I see the big picture, we have given enough.

as long as the left can get folks to give an inch they will never stop until we are disarmed, period.

 

[knastera]

"Moms" to protest NRAHQ 10/6 10AM

You missed my point. Whether the NRA recommended the ATF examine bump fire, it was going to anyway. The recommendation changed nothing other than the optics which do not look good for us. Not only does the NRA show a willingness to work on things, it also gets to pin this on Obama. Think about how it helps our ability to reason with others, when they say, "the NRA is against any gun regulations" we can say, "what about its recommendations on bump fire stocks?" They'll have no answer for that.

 

[Glaron]

so you really do want to give an inch, you are willing to give them what they want? your a leftist compromiser? ok, now we know.

Let us be quite clear let a wacko determine national policy? Yeah!!!!!

One thing I have learned give an inch the liberals will take it and look for the next inch you pussies will give. Until your back is against the wall. My back been at that wall one too many times Im not going there voluntarily.

I might not own crap they are whining about but I support America. Land of the FREE! That includes not giving an inch for rights.

~G

 

[GlocksAndPatriots]

I generally oppose most gun laws, and I certainly oppose the NFA rules. That said, if actual machine guns are covered by NFA, I don't see any good reason for bump stocks to not be similarly covered.

 

[AlanInSilverSpring]

You missed my point. Whether the NRA recommended the ATF examine bump fire, it was going to anyway. The recommendation changed nothing other than the optics which do not look good for us. Not only does the NRA show a willingness to work on things, it also gets to pin this on Obama. Think about how it helps our ability to reason with others, when they say, "the NRA is against any gun regulations" we can say, "what about its recommendations on bump fire stocks?" They'll have no answer for that.

No answer ? I would have posted sooner but I had to wipe the tears from my eyes after all the laughter. Here's their answer.....

"So what ? The nra, atf, and Obama were wrong to begin with. Repeal of legality of bump fires is simply undoing a horrendously bad decision to begin with. Besides, everybody knows the only reason the nra suggested taking another look at them was purely a public relations stunt so STFU you knuckle dragging blood thirsty neanderthal"

 

[knastera]

You are a very sad man. BLOCKING

 

[AlanInSilverSpring]

I generally oppose most gun laws, and I certainly oppose the NFA rules. That said, if actual machine guns are covered by NFA, I don't see any good reason for bump stocks to not be similarly covered.

Say bye bye to those evil binary triggers too then.

NEXT BAN coming soon....... [size=-2] nibble nibble nibble [/size]

 

[AlanInSilverSpring]

You are a very sad man. BLOCKING

you responding to the "sad name caller" or the guy actually trying to give you something to think about ?

 

[DraKhen99]

you responding to the "sad name caller" or the guy actually trying to give you something to think about ?

I don't think he hears (sees) you!

I do... and F 'em (anti-2a-ers), don't give an inch.

-John

 

[Schipperke]

You are a very sad name caller. Try to see the bigger picture. I think the NRA got this right. They were able to pin bump fire on Obama, and recommendation or not, the ATF was going to look into bump fire stocks. Why not win a battle in the propaganda war when it costs us almost nothing? All of the improvement features people mentioned are straw man arguments.
Again, I think that the vast majority of gun laws are unconstitutional. The war we have to win to keep our 2A rights has to see the bigger picture. The nation sees the NRA as the face of all gun owners. This is a public relations win.

You missed my point. Whether the NRA recommended the ATF examine bump fire, it was going to anyway. The recommendation changed nothing other than the optics which do not look good for us. Not only does the NRA show a willingness to work on things, it also gets to pin this on Obama. Think about how it helps our ability to reason with others, when they say, "the NRA is against any gun regulations" we can say, "what about its recommendations on bump fire stocks?" They'll have no answer for that.

This, and they steer the issue away from legislators. You have to listen to Cox and Lapierre unfiltered. I agree this nod to ATF was not bad.
Why do people speculate ATF will look at this and opine they made a mistake? Hell, these admins at boutique agencies would rather drink lye than admit they made a mistake. Be funny as hell ATF comes back with vigorous defense of it's original position.

 

[Mr. Ed]

Let us be quite clear let a wacko determine national policy? Yeah!!!!!

One thing I have learned give an inch the liberals will take it and look for the next inch you pussies will give. Until your back is against the wall. My back been at that wall one too many times Im not going there voluntarily.

I might not own crap they are whining about but I support America. Land of the FREE! That includes not giving an inch for rights.

~G

That's the part I don't get... ONE guy goes off the reservation and it's the fault of the device, not the guy. For sure, he did an incredible amount of damage with those things and I'm not in any way minimizing it. But the majority of Americans would never even have known about them without the MSM advertising the crap out of them 24/7. Now those things are the new Beanie Babies of the gun world.

A properly placed i.e.d. in that crowd would have done a similar amount of damage, probably a lot more. But more folks are killed every day on our highways by repeat drunk drivers, or in Chicago every week by thugs who should be in jail. Nobody in the media seems to GAF about them. Just the one guy.

Maybe it's because all of a sudden, folks realize that it could have been THEM in that crowd. Like folks in a movie theater with two exits, or in a church with one, most of us just aren't able to defend ourselves against those kinds of attacks. As my urban friends say, "Shit just got real."

 

[iH8DemLibz]

I think people who want to give away the plastic sliding stock devices because 58 peopled died are missing the point. Cuzz sacrificial lambs and appeasement rarely works.

What happens when the next shooting results in 62 people dead? What will the Left point to as the evil culprit? Since we no longer have the plastic sliding stock devices to blame.

The Left will surely look for, and find, a shiny new evil object to blame. Once we eliminate all of the "Gadgets", and people keep dying, the only dangerous items left will be the guns themselves.

People need to put on their big boys pants and realize this is what the Left is going for. Lots of people died, but bad shyt happens in a free society. We need to stand our ground.

 

[Brychan]

I think people who want to give away the plastic sliding stock devices because 58 peopled died are missing the point. Cuzz sacrificial lambs and appeasement rarely works.

What happens when the next shooting results in 62 people dead? What will the Left point to as the evil culprit? Since we no longer have the plastic sliding stock devices to blame.

The Left will surely look for, and find, a shiny new evil object to blame. Once we eliminate all of the "Gadgets", and people keep dying, the only dangerous items left will be the guns themselves.

People need to put on their big boys pants and realize this is what the Left is going for. Lots of people died, but bad shyt happens in a free society. We need to stand our ground.

 

[CypherPunk]

I generally oppose most gun laws, and I certainly oppose the NFA rules. That said, if actual machine guns are covered by NFA, I don't see any good reason for bump stocks to not be similarly covered.

Does this mean you support making belt loops and twigs illegal as well - because I can demonstrate bump stop type firing with both of those quite easily?

 

[AlanInSilverSpring]

I don't think he hears (sees) you!

I do... and F 'em (anti-2a-ers), don't give an inch.

-John

I'm guessing where in my post it says " STFU you knuckle dragging blood thirsty neanderthal" they missed that that was what the antis would say.

Truly sad though. Too many people would give up their rights simply because it doesn't affect them directly right now.


First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

 

[GBMaryland]

In general, I think the point is that bump stocks emulate machine gun fire, which are expressly made difficult to purchase by Federal law.

Bump stocks have now been used to commit a pretty serious crime, just as tommy guns were in the 20s. As such, there is a legitimate need to regulate that specific type of device, and devices that perform the same function.

When someone is playing around with a bump stock, they are generally doing it because they feel like the got away with something, like forbidden fruit. “I go me a machine gun!” Machine guns are regulated because they can do an inordinate amount of damage.

Our eventual win for gun rights does have to be metered with some level of public safety. I think the NRA did exactly the right thing;it’s not like they don’t rightly oppose pretty much everything else.

 

[Stoveman]

In general, I think the point is that bump stocks emulate machine gun fire, which are expressly made difficult to purchase by Federal law.

Bump stocks have now been used to commit a pretty serious crime, just as tommy guns were in the 20s. As such, there is a legitimate need to regulate that specific type of device, and devices that perform the same function.

When someone is playing around with a bump stock, they are generally doing it because they feel like the got away with something, like forbidden fruit. “I go me a machine gun!” Machine guns are regulated because they can do an inordinate amount of damage.

Our eventual win for gun rights does have to be metered with some level of public safety. I think the NRA did exactly the right thing;it’s not like they don’t rightly oppose pretty much everything else.

Why have they been so easily available if they were truly a menace to a civil society?


SHALL

NOT

BE

INFRINGED!

 

[ironpony]

I'm guessing there were not many moms there?
Why am I not seeing it mentioned that the 2A was created to prevent a tyrannical .gov (foreign or domestic) and seeing what the military has the .gov wants to limit the actual owners of this country (citizens) to owning slingshots in comparison. Please tell me if I am wrong, is this the wrong way to think?