Often, anti-gun loons will talk about how the NRA was not always a gun-rights lobby. Just one example... https://www.bradyunited.org/blog/think-you-know-the-nra-guess-again Lets assume this is true, and the NRA did not lobby against gun control until 1975. Let's assume the NRA is as powerful and effective in its lobbying efforts as the Brady Boobs, et al say it is. -If not for the NRA and that focus, where would the right of the people to keep and bear arms be today? -That said, why should I care the NRA added its focus on gun rights and is responsible for preventing the above?
well I always note that the Democratic Party was not hostile to people keeping and bearing arms. True, FDR hated private firearms ownership and wanted to ban the ownership of handguns. But Harry Truman was no gun banner and JFK was an NRA Life Member. LBJ was more a panderer trying to stave off Nixon's effective attacks on Democrats being soft on crime, than a true gun hater and HHH, who lost to Nixon in 1968 was more pro gun than Nixon ever was. But by Jimmy Carter's time, the Democrat party started its quick slide to becoming militantly anti gun owners and gun ownership. No longer was gun control a way the Democrats could pander to low wattage voters who wanted something done about crime or to pretend that gun control was a valid form of crime control. The last 30+ years has been mainly about attacking those voters and organizations that called bullshit on the scam democrats started pushing as early as 1934
-If not for the NRA and that focus, where would the right of the people to keep and bear arms be today? -That said, why should I care the NRA added its focus on gun rights and is responsible for preventing the above?
There was. You are either unwilling, or unable, to address it. -If not for the NRA and that focus, where would the right of the people to keep and bear arms be today? -That said, why should I care the NRA added its focus on gun rights and is responsible for preventing the above?
You are giving a front for Russian money laundering credit for the 2nd amendment. The 2nd amendment would still be the same today without the NRA laundering Russian money.
I answered your question. The 2nd Amendment would still exist even if the NRA had never existed. Are you doing multi level marketing and trying to recruit new members for the Russian money laundering organization?
I asked: If not for the NRA and that focus, where would the right of the people to keep and bear arms be today? Your response does not address this question. But, you know this.
The NRA played a historic role in gun rights legislation from 1975 to maybe around 2003, but maybe it's time (or even a little past time) gun rights supporters begin organizing around another organization. It's rare for one single organization to last forever and be able to last into perpetuity. Eventually it falls into disorder, dysfunctionality, corruption. And I believe that has (kind of) been the case for the NRA. The danger though with lots of a little groups vying to substitute for the NRA is that the organization could fragment and become disunified, lose strength and momentum. This seems to be a problem for conservatives in other areas, like the media.
it would be the same. How many times to I have to explain it to you. The 2nd amendment is the only thing that has stopped reasonable gun safety legislation. The NRA has just been monetizing the 2nd amendment all this time, so they got rich from rubes, because they didn't provide anything that the Constitution didn't already do.
:blink: Why do yo believe the NRA has had no effect on gun laws and gun policy in the US? In specific terms, how has it done that?
How does the 2nd amendment protect people's right to bear arms? Sorry, i'm not going to answer that question. The NRA hasn't stopped anything from happening. The 2nd amendment has.
"reasonable gun safety legislation" is stuff Democrats spew to pander to stupid people who think such measures will actually reduce violent crime, when the real motivation is to harass pro gun voters 1) registration-criminals cannot be charged for failing to register a gun. They can be charged for merely possessing a gun. we don't need registration for that. If someone is unable to own a gun, the cops can figure that out in the same time it takes to check to see if the gun is registered. So registration is not a "sensible gun safety regulation" 2) waiting periods-don't apply to criminals, they cannot buy through shops. Waiting periods were originally designed to kill off weekend gun shows. A massive study by Duke University could not find any crime reduction value to waiting periods. 3) banning "semi autos" and normal capacity magazines--such a law has nothing to do with gun safety and is designed to disarm lawful gun owners
As usual, you are wrong. The NRA was a prominent advocate and supporter of the pro gun rights litigation that lead to mostly correct supreme court decisions. Democrats hate the NRA since the NRA was a major reason why Al Gore lost his home state in 2000 and many other leftist scum were defeat in national and local elections
as opposed to those pathetic Grifter organizations such as the Brady Bunch, the Sandy Hook Promise, "Safer America" and other schemes to enrich leftist operatives by emotobabbling weak minded people to give them money to "Save little children" ?
You don't understand the question. I'll re-ask. When has "reasonable gun safety legislation" been overturned on 2nd Amendment grounds? Apparently, all the people whining and crying about the power of the NRA and how its it responsible for the failure to enact common sense gun safety laws have been lying to themselves. Right?
listen, I have stated this dozens of times passing malum prohibitum laws to stop people from committing malum per se offenses is moronic. liberals do that because they know the passage of a law restricts lawful folks and that is their goal. Enforcing laws against those who commit real offenses restricts those people
gun banners hate the NRA because almost every anti gun activist is really a left wing operative and the NRA has helped keep their beloved socialists out of office
The only people restricted by the law are people who are law abiding. There is no law that restricts criminals.
