JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Well, after reading that single sided article from MSN, I think the NRA could use a financial boost. Wounded they might be, but they're still in the fight and gun owners need to support that fight for our constitutional rights...
 
Hmm...wondering if maybe he might have just been flushing some more out, vs being "handled" (vy poorly), and simply catching on to the handling?

IMHO Trump, who spent his whole life in New York, is inclined to enact more gun control and bans. I think that's where his natural, internal instincts are. But, he's running as a Republican, and the reality of Republican voters, especially in fly-over country, abandoning him if he enacts gun bans is VERY real. The movement on guns is still in wrong direction. No public discussion of National Reciprocity or the Hearing Protection Act. These issues are for all practical purposes dead, for now. I am honestly concerned that once Trump is re-elected (and I think he will be) he'll be willing to enact more stricter gun controls, especially if the communists pick up seats in Congress or the Senate. Gun folks need to be ever skeptical and vigilant. The political winds are not in our favor. The communists are solidifying their chokeholds on urban areas like Portland, Seattle, Houston, etc.., and urban liberals are solidly in favor of banning all guns.
 
Well, after reading that single sided article from MSN, I think the NRA could use a financial boost. Wounded they might be, but they're still in the fight and gun owners need to support that fight for our constitutional rights...

The only thing missing from that piece of sh..... um, article, is how the evil racist NRA used it's mind control powers, making Trump spew its brown and black baby murdering propaganda.



Ray
 
Well, after reading that single sided article from MSN, I think the NRA could use a financial boost. Wounded they might be, but they're still in the fight and gun owners need to support that fight for our constitutional rights...

Here's what I always tell NRA haters (and tbh, I'm really not that fond of them myself)...

The NRA has lobbied with ~$5M in 2018. (Lobbying Spending Database - National Rifle Assn, 2018 | OpenSecrets)

That money was garnered by ~5M members and is (supposed to be) the representative voice of 5M people.

Let's compare that to other lobby groups. Big Pharma spent $16M. Blue Cross/Blue Shield spent $12M. Amazon and Facebook spent $8M and $7.5M, respectively. These are all companies that are shaping public policy to enhance the profits of what, less than 100 people total? Do Amazon's warehouse workers benefit from their lobby money? Yea, I didn't think so.

So, what's more democratic - an organization that influences public policy using dollars from 5M people with the goal of protecting a right or an org that influences public policy to enhance the profits for its board of directors? Aren't y'all the same people that say "one man, one vote?"

So, really, let's lay off the NRA hate. And boy, if you think the NRA has politicians in their pocket, you should see the parties Big Pharma and the Assn of Realtors throw. I'm sure their shindigs make the NRA's look like a frat house kegger in comparison.
 
Here's what I always tell NRA haters (and tbh, I'm really not that fond of them myself)...

The NRA has lobbied with ~$5M in 2018. (Lobbying Spending Database - National Rifle Assn, 2018 | OpenSecrets)

That money was garnered by ~5M members and is (supposed to be) the representative voice of 5M people.

Let's compare that to other lobby groups. Big Pharma spent $16M. Blue Cross/Blue Shield spent $12M. Amazon and Facebook spent $8M and $7.5M, respectively. These are all companies that are shaping public policy to enhance the profits of what, less than 100 people total? Do Amazon's warehouse workers benefit from their lobby money? Yea, I didn't think so.

So, what's more democratic - an organization that influences public policy using dollars from 5M people with the goal of protecting a right or an org that influences public policy to enhance the profits for its board of directors? Aren't y'all the same people that say "one man, one vote?"

So, really, let's lay off the NRA hate. And boy, if you think the NRA has politicians in their pocket, you should see the parties Big Pharma and the Assn of Realtors throw. I'm sure their shindigs make the NRA's look like a frat house kegger in comparison.

I'm an NRA life member, and while I do have very deep concerns with how the NRA governs itself, it's looking like personal lobbying from Wayne LaPierre is turning Trump away from more draconian action on guns.
 
We as gun owners need to make a compromise... fund healthcare and deregulate suppressors. Sounds like a fair deal to me.
 
I'm an NRA life member, and while I do have very deep concerns with how the NRA governs itself, it's looking like personal lobbying from Wayne LaPierre is turning Trump away from more draconian action on guns.

Don't get me wrong, I have my membership card as well. I would just like them to do more in the fight for public perception. They spent $1/member in 2018 lobbying. That's it. Where'd the rest of the money go?

IMO, the best way to protect 2A is to educate. Push people to buy a gun in their state, if only to return it right back to the shop. Go through the process first hand. Take a safety course. Take a shooting course. Get air-rifle ranges built in high schools w/ trips to the range to competition shoot some .22's. They should be spending twice what they spend lobbying in building and expanding the community.

/threadHijack
 
We as gun owners need to make a compromise... fund healthcare and deregulate suppressors. Sounds like a fair deal to me.
I'll agree to funding healthcare when it comes with the stipulation that you lose your "right to healthcare" for making poor dietary decisions. You can eat your way to the grave for all I care, but if we're going to pay for it as a society, then you need to shoulder the responsibility to stay in shape.
 
I'll agree to funding healthcare when it comes with the stipulation that you lose your "right to healthcare" for making poor dietary decisions. You can eat your way to the grave for all I care, but if we're going to pay for it as a society, then you need to shoulder the responsibility to stay in shape.
Agree 100% here. also, if you engage in any other activities that can cause harm, like riding a motorcycle, maybe scuba dive, or maybe even owning a sports car.:rolleyes:
 
I'll agree to funding healthcare when it comes with the stipulation that you lose your "right to healthcare" for making poor dietary decisions. You can eat your way to the grave for all I care, but if we're going to pay for it as a society, then you need to shoulder the responsibility to stay in shape.
Agree 100% here. also, if you engage in any other activities that can cause harm, like riding a motorcycle, maybe scuba dive, or maybe even owning a sports car.:rolleyes:

That's not very libertarian..
 
I'll agree to funding healthcare when it comes with the stipulation that you lose your "right to healthcare" for making poor dietary decisions. You can eat your way to the grave for all I care, but if we're going to pay for it as a society, then you need to shoulder the responsibility to stay in shape.


My old job did this. You got a credit for being in shape that basically = your payment.

Not saying I agree with it at a federal level, but its an interesting idea.
 
My old job did this. You got a credit for being in shape that basically = your payment.

Not saying I agree with it at a federal level, but its an interesting idea.
I'd prefer to be on the libertarian end of things and simply say it's not the gov's responsibility to provide healthcare.

But, if one absolutely *had* to have the fed provide, then I fully believe some sort of personal responsibility needs to come with it. In this scenario, you have a *Right* to life and liberty but you have the *Privilege* of federally funded healthcare. Privileges come with string attached and they can be taken away.

That'd be my compromise, anyway.
 
That's not very libertarian..
Only saying its a very slippery slope. If saying one kind of unhealthy activity will cost you, then why not another.. including firearm ownership.. i mean we all know how government works. ;) I dont think the .gov should be in the health care, or in the general welfare business
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top