NRA cuts deal to silence grass roots gun groups.

[Jamie6.5]

But the bill does nothing to curb union spending. Which is at least as threatening as corporate spending where elections are concerned.

 

[Outrider]

But the bill does nothing to curb union spending. Which is at least as threatening as corporate spending where elections are concerned.

Absolutely. I'm not defending the bill. It's just this thread has become the typical thing where someone puts an inflammatory title on it that is misleading about the actual problem.

How can we figure out how to fix something when the focus is wrong?

 

[Chee-to]

First, you have to look at the legislation. Congress wants it to rollback the decision by the Supreme Court on campaign financing rules. The problem with what the Supreme Court did was that it opened the doors to elections being bought. Imagine powerful, deep pocket interests with views that are adverse to yours putting up a candidate and not having to divulge that the candidate was being funded (via corporations) almost exclusively by interests with ties to China. -Many would consider that a problem. That can be done right now without any problem so the current law needs to be fixed.

With the exemption, you're looking at the NRA's desire for self-preservation not a desire to "silence grass roots gun groups." If you would look at the legislation it does not just pertain to gun groups. It covers a lot of groups regardless of their politics. And the NRA is not supporting the bill's passage. It's just with the exemption they are not going to oppose it because it no longer pertains to them. Is the NRA being selfish? Absolutely, but they're not going to fund a fight and flex political muscle to protect other groups they don't care about. That's normal. When did you see the M.A.D.D. deciding to fight some piece of legislation on behalf of the NRA?

The exemption the NRA lobbied for covers any group that has over one million dues paying members that has been in existence for over ten years. The Sierra Club also falls into that category.

No one is debating your dedication to guns, but you're being manipulated. GOA hits the panic button and you turn into Chicken Little shouting, the "Sky is falling!" regardless of what the facts are.

Hey I'm willing to learn, please explain why OFF and GOA is hitting the "panic button" if this bill doesn't affect them ? Why is it being "pushed" with such urgency before the Nov. elections ? Could be you're the one being manipulated, believing this legislation is harmless to gun owners and free speech ......

 

[Gunner3456]

Hey I'm willing to learn, please explain why OFF and GOA is hitting the "panic button"

Money, honey. Causes bring in money.

"Never let a good crisis go to waste, even if you have to manufacture the crisis or even fudge the truth about it."

 

[Chee-to]

Money, honey. Causes bring in money.

"Never let a good crisis go to waste, even if you have to manufacture the crisis or even fudge the truth about it."

From Kevin Starrett, @ OFF

I am always amused by folks who claim we are :

1) lying

2) sensationalizing

3) just trying to raise money

But never give examples. The last few requests for funds have been 100% for others, and we rarely do it in our e-mail alerts.

 

[deen_ad]

The more I see of them, the more I'm convinced that OFF's best talent is crying wolf in a sensationalized manner, all in the interest of raising money.

I'll never believe another thing they say. I'm completely tired of their ch@t.

Am I the only one who's perceiving them as being full of BS?

No you're not!!

Deen
NRA Benefactor/Recruiter
WAC member
SWWAC member

 

[Outrider]

Hey I'm willing to learn, please explain why OFF and GOA is hitting the "panic button" if this bill doesn't affect them ? Why is it being "pushed" with such urgency before the Nov. elections ? Could be you're the one being manipulated, believing this legislation is harmless to gun owners and free speech ......

I did not say the legislation is harmless or that the bill would not affect the GOA or OFF but like the other stuff, your reading comprehension is lacking. As for being willing to learn, you have demonstrated a resolute unwillingness to learn. You post GOA propaganda every chance you get even though you have been shown repeatedly that the information you are posting is almost always misleading and often incorrect.

You asked why GOA and OFF hit the panic button. GOA and OFF do it because by getting you (and other drones) to fire off a form email, it is a way for them to demonstrate their organizational influence. You trust whatever they say (without bothering to verify it) and you do whatever they direct (without thinking about it). If they get enough people like you, politicians have to take notice.

 

[Gunner3456]

From Kevin Starrett, @ OFF

I am always amused by folks who claim we are :

1) lying

2) sensationalizing

3) just trying to raise money

But never give examples. The last few requests for funds have been 100% for others, and we rarely do it in our e-mail alerts.

You're amused? What an odd reaction.

I'm not amused.

If you read the threads, I gave lots of examples of why I believe you sensationalize and even give "facts" which you know nothing about in an attempt to raise money and to raise your profile as big shots.

BTW, you forgot to end your post by asking for money so I'll help you out here with a reminder.

 

[Chee-to]

I did not say the legislation is harmless or that the bill would not affect the GOA or OFF but like the other stuff, your reading comprehension is lacking. As for being willing to learn, you have demonstrated a resolute unwillingness to learn. You post GOA propaganda every chance you get even though you have been shown repeatedly that the information you are posting is almost always misleading and often incorrect.

You asked why GOA and OFF hit the panic button. GOA and OFF do it because by getting you (and other drones) to fire off a form email, it is a way for them to demonstrate their organizational influence. You trust whatever they say (without bothering to verify it) and you do whatever they direct (without thinking about it). If they get enough people like you, politicians have to take notice.

As I expected no answer, more BS, typical name calling and liberal rhetoric. Come on lets see some of your "facts." what's misleading and incorrect ? Post links to your information, or are you just spouting more ignorant conjecture ? In other words back it up ....

Here now attack these guys.....

<broken link removed>

 

[Chee-to]

You're amused? What an odd reaction.

I'm not amused.

If you read the threads, I gave lots of examples of why I believe you sensationalize and even give "facts" which you know nothing about in an attempt to raise money and to raise your profile as big shots.

BTW, you forgot to end your post by asking for money so I'll help you out here with a reminder.

You ain't got nothing, Jeez...............

 

[Jamie6.5]

If they get enough people like you, politicians have to take notice.

I'll give you $10.00 if you can show me the down side of "politicians have to take notice."

 

[Jamie6.5]

BTW, you forgot to end your post by asking for money so I'll help you out here with a reminder.

Good job gunner!! He's most likely raising money for other people involved in the battle over gun rights.
Just like OFF!

 

[U201491]

All the details of this are not fully known yet, and I know that the NRA will not do anything to cause a deterioration of 2nd Amendment rights. Many of us have inquired about this with them, and I mean hundreds of thousands, wanting answers and clarification of what is being reported and are waiting for the NRA's answers and actions. We also expressed a strong displeasure with them if it were as bad as some seem to think it is.

There are pro gun folks that are anti NRA, and what all pro gun groups should be doing is joining forces. Not one Pro 2nd Amendment organization in this Nation has done as much for the gun owners as the NRA has. Bad mouthing them puts people into the hands of the anti groups. They sit back and wring their hands at this crap.
STOP giving them that !

As for the comment the anti gun stuff is just imagined, that is as far from the truth as can be said. Maybe not in this but there is a very big anti gun movement that loves the infighting that things like this creates.

For the one that stated that they have not taken the guns yet.
They can't if that day comes and each person says NO and fights back. They may kill a few hundred citizens, but if that would happen there would be an uproar in this country like even the revolutionary war did not see.
I was shocked when the people in the UK and the people in Australia did not do this. It never has to happen in America. That will be up to all of you if that time comes.
You will have to ask how much your Constitution and Country are worth to you then.

As for the NRA they are not out to harm any pro gun organization. I won't even get into an arguement with anyone on that statement. It is what it is !

 

[Gunner3456]

You ain't got nothing, Jeez...............

There are two camps here. There are some who seem to think they know what and why, and the questions of lawfulness of what happened to Pyles. OFF almost immediately posted a long and adamant rant on their web site, putting them in that camp.

Then there are those who know that Pyles' personnel records (he was fired) and his psychiatric records and the details of the police record are sealed from the public by law. Those people know we don't have the whole story.

OFF's rant was a statement of "fact" wholly supportive of Pyles and cop-bashing. Go to their site and read it. It was totally irresponsible, based on speculation which they called facts, and it did of course ask for money. As I've said before, if Pyles is so badly wronged, a big law firm will take his case on a contingency and he doesn't need a legal fund.

For all we or OFF know, Pyles could be Jack The Ripper or he could be a really nice guy. The point is we don't know and neither does OFF. OFF sure as heck didn't know the facts about Pyles when they posted the very irresponsible rant about what happened to him as if they did know the facts. They were irresponsible in bashing the cops before they had the facts.

OFF will never build relationships with our legislature or our police departments with that behavior. They might raise some money and gain some members, but that won't do any good if they act like kooks.

If in your mind that's "nothing," then so be it. We are simply in two different camps on this.

 

[Karma]

But the bill does nothing to curb union spending. Which is at least as threatening as corporate spending where elections are concerned.

This is the entire point! People should be bothered when one side pushes a bill that would stifle free speech that predominantly comes from the other side, while making sure it doesn't impact their side.

Of course unions wouldn't be impacted, because that is the bread and butter of the administration! Come on guys. Is it that hard to see?

 

[Jamie6.5]

Of course unions wouldn't be impacted, because that is the bread and butter of the administration! Come on guys. Is it that hard to see?

No it isn't. Unless you are blinded by the promise of "hope and change!" And continue to vote the party line, as I believe most dems do, regardless of threats to their gun rights.

As far as I'm concerned, this election year I am on the bandwagon with "hope for change."

 

[Atroxus]

I am curious how many of the people freaking out in this thread have actually read even a portion of that bill? Anyone? If you haven't already maybe you should google search HR 5175. The text is pretty easy to find, and you may be suprised by what you find in it.

 

[snew]

I am curious how many of the people freaking out in this thread have actually read even a portion of that bill? Anyone? If you haven't already maybe you should google search HR 5175. The text is pretty easy to find, and you may be suprised by what you find in it.

Since you're so enlightened, why don't you tell us what you found that you think is pertinent? Give us a sort of "sneak peek" to whet out appetite to read more.

 

[Gunner3456]

I am curious how many of the people freaking out in this thread have actually read even a portion of that bill? Anyone? If you haven't already maybe you should google search HR 5175. The text is pretty easy to find, and you may be suprised by what you find in it.

I've read it. It doesn't target only gun groups. It gets everyone except of course the unions. Imho it's an unconstitutional assault on free speech.

Kudos to the NRA for also getting an exemption from it.

It got out of committee but only a few proposals which come out of committee ever make it to the House floor for consideration. If they pass the House, many aren't even taken up by the Senate. They are dead.

I don't see a chance at all of this passing the Senate. If it does, then it has to go to the SC as a violation of free speech and we can hope it is defeated there.

This is a long way from over, and a long way from becoming law, but worth watching.

 

[Chee-to]

There are two camps here. There are some who seem to think they know what and why, and the questions of lawfulness of what happened to Pyles. OFF almost immediately posted a long and adamant rant on their web site, putting them in that camp.

Then there are those who know that Pyles' personnel records (he was fired) and his psychiatric records and the details of the police record are sealed from the public by law. Those people know we don't have the whole story.

OFF's rant was a statement of "fact" wholly supportive of Pyles and cop-bashing. Go to their site and read it. It was totally irresponsible, based on speculation which they called facts, and it did of course ask for money. As I've said before, if Pyles is so badly wronged, a big law firm will take his case on a contingency and he doesn't need a legal fund.

For all we or OFF know, Pyles could be Jack The Ripper or he could be a really nice guy. The point is we don't know and neither does OFF. OFF sure as heck didn't know the facts about Pyles when they posted the very irresponsible rant about what happened to him as if they did know the facts. They were irresponsible in bashing the cops before they had the facts.

OFF will never build relationships with our legislature or our police departments with that behavior. They might raise some money and gain some members, but that won't do any good if they act like kooks.

If in your mind that's "nothing," then so be it. We are simply in two different camps on this.

There's just one problem: David Pyles didn't commit any crime, nor was he suspected of having committed one. The police never obtained a warrant for either search or arrest. They never consulted with a judge or mental health professional before sending out SWAT to take Pyle in. By noon the same day, Pyles had already been released from the Rogue Valley Medical Center with a clean bill of mental health. Four days later the Medford Police Department returned Pyle’s guns, despite telling him earlier in the week—falsely—that he'd need to undergo a second background check before he could get them back. Then the Medford Police Department put out a second press release, this time announcing that the agency had returned the "disgruntled" worker's guns, and "now considers this matter closed."