quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin
Even the articles you linked to don't definitively state, nor do they prove your notion that the NRA is an arm of the gun industry. Your notion is just the latest NRA bashing talking points. Just because the unabashedly biased pompous asshole Josh Sugarman says so simply because the NRA gets money from the industry, does not make it true.

Each industry in the country is represented by a lobbying group. The Oil and Gas have a few, so does retail, and automakers. For the firearm industry, the NRA is their lobbying group. The NRA enters into court cases when the out come serves the gun industry. Which is why it supported Mr. Heller in the case, Heller vs. D.C. If the NRA was truly supporting the common citizen with a firearm in a court case, and not the firearm industry. Please explain why they were absence in support (directly speaking) of Mr. George Zimmerman and Mr. Michael Dunn. Two characters whom used firearms in unlawful ways. Only one of them is now serving jail time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin
I can just imagine this conversation.

Gun industry to NRA: "Here's millions of dollars to help line your coffers".

NRA to gun industry: "Oh we can't take that money, the likes of Josh Sugarman might say we're a virtual subsidiary of the gun industry".

Fuck yes they're going to take the money. Are you fuckin kidding me.

Crooked and corrupted politicians will take money from anyone. The ones that try to be and stay honest, will question the origins of the funding and ask 'What will this group demand of us for such a donation'? The NRA does not care about America, her citizens, or the damage caused from the misuse of firearms. Only what the gun industry tells them to be concern on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin
From your article in The Atlantic:

"So who does the NRA speak for, again? The answer is: lots of people. Hard-core gun-devotees, frightened conservatives, its own well-paid leaders, gun makers, and ammo retailers all play into the mix. It would be reductive to call it a mere corporate lobbyist. But in any event, it's clear the NRA isn't just representing your average Joe Six-Shooter."

A wee bit of balance there but they left out 10's of millions of sportsman, collectors and enthusiasts.

Got a source for this information? From a non partisan site if you could please....

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin
In the same article they listed the amount donated by the gun industry in 2010. While significant it doesn't come close to the combined amounts donated by members, wealthy benefactors, advertising sales and other sources.

Yes, because 'honesty' is a virtue the NRA is often accused on, right? How about a full disclosure of their books? And the super PAC's that support them? Funny how conservatives often complain about the government holding secrets; yet their organizations, which operate like government's in their own right, try to keep everything hidden and under wraps. Can you say 'Hypocrites'?

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin
IMO, protecting the interests of the gun industry and protecting the Second Amendment rights for all Americans are one and the same.

Funny how the 2nd amendment is the most corrupted law in the nation. That we ignore the first half and reinterpete the second half anyways we want. Should we not be surprised by the problems it causes? Look at the 7th amendment. How often does that come up anymore? Do you even know what the 7th amendment actually is? No, of course not. You couldn't rattle off the five parts of the 1st amendment without looking them up. Dont bother opening your mouth on the 2nd!

I find it curious that when I ask the same individuals that support the corrupted version of the 2nd amendment, if they are 'ok', if people do the same to the 8th amendment, NONE of them are 'ok' with it. You know, we ignore the first half of the 8th and reinterpret the second have anyway we want. If its not 'ok' to do that with the 8th, and not 'ok' on twenty-five other amendments. Then its CERTAINLY, not 'ok', to do that on the 2nd. Yes, it got corrupted in the Heller verse D.C. case. The US Supreme Court Justices (the five conservative ones at that), did an end-run-around the 2nd amendment. Which branch of the federal system is allowed to reinterpret the definitions of amendments under the US Constitution? The Legislative. Usually the Supreme Court enters into issues when the lower court and the appellate courts have issues. But in Heller vs. D.C., both courts were in agreement. Mr. Heller didn't have an argument that the 2nd was being violated by D.C.'s firearm laws.

Yes, the first half of the amendment explains....WHO....has a Constitutional right to firearms and....WHY. The second half's meaning is lost on people for not understnading 18th century viewpoints. But instead, inserting 20th and 21st century propaganda. You know, the stuff coming out of the NRA....

Now what does the NRA gain by keeping American's clueless to the 2nd? Support for doing the gun industry's lobbying for pennies on the dollar. The Oil and Gas industry has to pay a pile of money for their lobbyist. But the gun industry has successfully pulled the wool over the sheep's eyes, and masquerade itself 'the defender of the 2nd amendment'. If you disbelieve me, go look into all the court cases the NRA has directly and indirectly supported. How many of those cases helped the individual on trial, but NOT, the gun industry? None of them. That should tell you something of which cases the NRA enters into and helps defend.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

No factual refutation, I see.

I found and entire site from the NRA site on their training programs all you have to do is go to their site and click on training.
Is that not a factual refutation because you don't like it?
You can pretend that it doesn't prove anything all you want but that doesn't mean it is true.
And what about all the information lovmuffin provided isn't that factual refutation.
Each of us has destroyed your lie.
What do we have to do, take you to a safety class?

Why, the ones you ignored, of course:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin
You only see the political action side of things because that's what makes headlines.

Including the NRA's own headlines.

Ever bemoan how Congress is controlled by outside money?

Or that businesses appear to be motivated by maximizing profit?

Why do you think the NRA is immune from outside money control?

Where is the NRA on these incidents? Defending against their boogie man.

Why isn't the NRA calling for fixing this flaw? Why isn't the NRA rolling out reminders about safety?

You know why. That's not their focus, and hasn't been since the 1980s.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

If by "refute" you mean "ignored by saying 'I don't give a fuck,'" then sure.

Perhaps not the most compelling argument in the history of logic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Already answered.

You ignored all the points highlighted in blue in favor of re-ranting the same old.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Well, since the one point you HAVE established is that you don't give a crap, I guess that's the common ground.

So just carry on not giving a crap. Glad we could have this enlightening chat.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Well, since the one point you HAVE established is that you don't give a crap, I guess that's the common ground.

So just carry on not giving a crap. Glad we could have this enlightening chat.

And once again since you obviously missed it, I modified the "I don't give a fuck" in post #699.

Not only that but you can stop yer squabbling over the S&W safety issue.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jsQWGS-P9Pk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Now if you had actually supported your claim instead of merely speculating, you'd be far less of an idiot.

Easy as that!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Yeah...have a recall, but don't let the word get out...

quote:

my claim was on what was most likely going on WITHOUT IT BEING PUBLICIZED