Gun Owners of America - Join Them!
https://gunowners.org/join.htm
Just now joined GOA for the first time. It's only $20 per year, and they have 1.5 million members.
They are legit. It's run by Larry Pratt.
Just now joined GOA for the first time. It's only $20 per year, and they have 1.5 million members.
They are legit. It's run by Larry Pratt.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
The problem with GOA is they are all or nothing. So if they don't get their way they stomp feet on the way home and pout all evening while the other side gets more or keeps what they have. They cannot accept a half a loaf now and get the other half next week.
Being all or nothing is a good way to lose everything rather than gain bit by bit. How do you think the lefties out there got where we are now. Their argument of-- you can keep your guns but we need to do a little ________ just to make things safer. But yes its a minor infringement but it will keep many people alive and healthy.
Sometimes you have to realize your position is on the losing end and go with a bit of a trade off in damage control mode. So the NRA says, let the BATF look at it and see about regulations. They did not surrender on the new gun control laws idea or any such.
Nemo
Being all or nothing is a good way to lose everything rather than gain bit by bit. How do you think the lefties out there got where we are now. Their argument of-- you can keep your guns but we need to do a little ________ just to make things safer. But yes its a minor infringement but it will keep many people alive and healthy.
Sometimes you have to realize your position is on the losing end and go with a bit of a trade off in damage control mode. So the NRA says, let the BATF look at it and see about regulations. They did not surrender on the new gun control laws idea or any such.
Nemo
Stockholm Syndrome strikes again. Quit lying to protect your abuser.So the NRA says, let the BATF look at it and see about regulations. They did not surrender on the new gun control laws idea or any such.
Nemo
https://home.nra.org/joint-statement/
NRA said:"The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."
Learn to read the source you cite.Stockholm Syndrome strikes again. Quit lying to protect your abuser.
https://home.nra.org/joint-statement/
No suggestion of new gun law. A call for a review of the current regulations and suggestion additional regulations on the stocks may be appropriate.
To save clicking your source is copied below to try to educate you some. Yes its tough but I do try.
Nemo
(FAIRFAX, VA) - The National Rifle Association today issued the following statement:
"In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks. This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans' Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence."
No. You euphemistically state that the NRA said regulations "may be appropriate". That is not what the NRA said. The NRA actually said that bump fire devices "should be subject to additional regulations".Learn to read the source you cite.
No suggestion of new gun law. A call for a review of the current regulations and suggestion additional regulations on the stocks may be appropriate.
Stop defending your abuser. They sold our rights out to frighten people in to paying them.
Is this not an argument that the NRA is capitulating? WE get to keep what? From whom?suggestion additional regulations on the stocks may be appropriate.
Nemo
This compromise on what shouldn't be compromise has gotten us to the point where gun owners are arguing over whether or not the NRA's call for more regulation should be tolerated or not....
So if somebody invents a hand grenade that does not use an “explosive“ filler but instead creates an overpressure scenario through some other type of chemical process.... Do you think Gun Owners of America would stand up for my right to exploit this loophole in the federal hand grenade law (the NFA and the definition of “destructive deviceâ€)?
I mean we know those sellout quislings in the NRA would say
“if it’s portable like a hand grenade, and it looks like a hand grenade, and blows the sheet out of things like a hand grenade, well, maybe we should regulate it similar to the way real Hand Grenades are regulated.â€
Would GOA say anything different?
I mean we know those sellout quislings in the NRA would say
“if it’s portable like a hand grenade, and it looks like a hand grenade, and blows the sheet out of things like a hand grenade, well, maybe we should regulate it similar to the way real Hand Grenades are regulated.â€
Would GOA say anything different?
Attachments
-
34.2 KB Views: 137
Your red herring is not helpful in discussing the actual events that have unfolded with the NRA.So if somebody invents a hand grenade that does not use an "explosive" filler but instead creates an overpressure scenario through some other type of chemical process.... Do you think Gun Owners of America would stand up for my right to exploit this loophole in the federal hand grenade law (the NFA and the definition of "destructive device")?
Exactly.Is this not an argument that the NRA is capitulating? WE get to keep what? From whom?
This compromise on what shouldn't be compromise has gotten us to the point where gun owners are arguing over whether or not the NRA's call for more regulation should be tolerated or not....
A compromise involves both sides giving something up in order to come to a mutual agreement. When did compromise start meaning one side gives up something and gets nothing in return?
:righton:https://gunowners.org/join.htm
Just now joined GOA for the first time. It's only $20 per year, and they have 1.5 million members.
They are legit. It's run by Larry Pratt.
They're good, and their political grading is legitimate. There are other organizations that support gun rights that gun owners should consider supporting. It's not like you can only join one!
No it does not include the "right to blow up the government's tanks and stuff. Some would say that is a childish question. I don't think is childish. I think you are trying to push an idea that the 2nd Amendment means something different than what the forefathers meantwhich ones will fight for my right to own bazookas?
Because the Second Amendment has to include the right to blow up the government's tanks and the cops armored personnel carriers.
Right?
What is the 2nd Amendment for if not to give voice to the right of the People to defend themselves from an over reaching government that does not serve the will of the people?
My bet is that you Gunsmoker will not give a clear precise and concise answer to that question. I believe you have been asked it in various forms before.
Not the "right", but the "capability".Because the Second Amendment has to include the right to blow up the government's tanks and the cops armored personnel carriers.
If necessary.
Each successive trade seems to involve giving ground and in return we get to be grateful more was not taken. That is not compromise, it's losing.Sometimes you have to realize your position is on the losing end and go with a bit of a trade off in damage control mode. So the NRA says, let the BATF look at it and see about regulations. They did not surrender on the new gun control laws idea or any such.
And BATFE regulations are law. The NRA asked the BATFE to revisit regulations in our favor and see if they could come up with new ones. That is gun control any way you slice it. It's actually worse than laws because no congressional vote is required.
Maintaining the ability to blow up government tanks is precisely why the second amendment was written. To argue otherwise is simply absurd.which ones will fight for my right to own bazookas?
Because the Second Amendment has to include the right to blow up the government's tanks and the cops armored personnel carriers.
Right?
"The power of the sword, say the minority..., is in the hands of Congress. My friends and countrymen, it is not so, for The powers of the sword are in the hands of the yeomanry of America from sixteen to sixty. The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords and every terrible implement of the soldier are the birthright of Americans."
-- Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
That case has already been litigated by the NAR (National Association of Rocketry) and the TRA (Tripoli Rocketry Association) and the BATFE lost. We spent $500,000 and 10 years litigating it, so I can only imagine what the government wasted defending a regulation that was not supported by the law.So if somebody invents a hand grenade that does not use an "explosive" filler but instead creates an overpressure scenario through some other type of chemical process.
http://www.v-serv.com/usr/ATFE-03-16-09.pdf
Red herring. The NRA is currently not standing up for our right to own bump stocks (not a loophole, BTW) and GOA is. When we get through this and get to hand grenades, which should be legal, then we can discuss GOA's actual position, and not what you speculate it might be.... Do you think Gun Owners of America would stand up for my right to exploit this loophole in the federal hand grenade law (the NFA and the definition of "destructive device")?
The left's approach of chipping away at whatever they're attempting to destroy or turn for their own advantage is an excellent strategy for accomplishing their end goals. It's a "death by a thousand cuts" approach that appears so innocuous the target may hardly notice it until it's too late.The problem with GOA is they are all or nothing. So if they don't get their way they stomp feet on the way home and pout all evening while the other side gets more or keeps what they have. They cannot accept a half a loaf now and get the other half next week.
Being all or nothing is a good way to lose everything rather than gain bit by bit. How do you think the lefties out there got where we are now. Their argument of-- you can keep your guns but we need to do a little ________ just to make things safer. But yes its a minor infringement but it will keep many people alive and healthy.
That's exactly how we ended up in the position we now find ourselves. And we think that using the same strategy to get back that which is lost is the best approach? Absolutely not! We should have responded to them with a definitive "No!" when it happened and not rolled over and acquiesced.
The NRA's approach is to break bread over lunch and "only" give up this for that.
Other's would rather just kick them in the balls and tell them FOAD.
There's no "right" in the 2nd Amendment to blow up anything belonging to the government or anyone else. The right to bear arms conveys a military implication. That right allows the people to protect themselves from "the government." But you already know that.which ones will fight for my right to own bazookas?
Because the second amendment has to include the right to blow up the government's tanks and the cops armored personnel carriers.
Right?
![]()
As far as that bazooka or whatever, Tench Coxe said: "Their [the militia] swords and every terrible implement of the soldier are the birthright of Americans." Sounds like that bazooka, hand grenades and more are the people's right. But you already know that too.
As far as GOA, I've been a member for years.
Locally, we should all belong to Georgia Carry.
Locally, we should all belong to Georgia Carry.
I believe both the NRA and GOA are useful. Martin Luther King would not have been nearly as successful without the threat of Jesse Jackson and his marchers. Good cop, bad cop is a cultural icon because it works in so many situations. We need both groups in order to get our rights back.
JPFO Position on bump stocks
Another organization that gets it, "Infringing on 'bump' stocks would justify infringing
on any firearm or device. We adamantly oppose that."
http://jpfo.org/alerts2017/alert20171017.htm
.
Another organization that gets it, "Infringing on 'bump' stocks would justify infringing
on any firearm or device. We adamantly oppose that."
http://jpfo.org/alerts2017/alert20171017.htm
.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing
A forum community dedicated to Georgia firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Malum Prohibitum
409 Replies
Nemo
355 Replies
seajay
113 Replies
Recommended Communities
