The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 5, 2017, 09:28 PM   #126
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 21,128
Quote:
Folks this is what is called a PIVOT.

You should read Al Franken book "Lion of the Senate" to understand it...
Is that where you learned to do the Gish Gallop?
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 09:34 PM   #127
mehavey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 4,824
Quote:
...90% hit rate....
He'd be lucky to get 10% after first 30-60 sec with even that target set at that range.

But I'll wait to hear how many casing they finally pick up ... both inside any under the room location.
https://i.redd.it/a7bbn2ye4lry.png
(memento from the Greatest Generation)
mehavey is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 09:57 PM   #128
5whiskey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 2,431
You guys need to chill. Seriously. We haven't even buried the dead yet and there's internet fighting over something, in the grand scheme of things, will affect about .01% of the population. I get the slippery slope argument, which is why I'm not passing judgement on the issue yet.

I would like for investigators to uncover the motive and reveal more about the means before I personally pass judgement on how I feel about any new law. For all we know, the shooter was anti-2A and believed he was saving lives in the future by taking some that day. If that comes out that will take the wind out of any gun grabbers sails. That's pure speculation but the point is this should be investigated and reasoned out. Until then its poor form to bicker over it IMO.
5whiskey is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 09:59 PM   #129
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 21,128
Quote:
I would like for investigators to uncover the motive and reveal more about the means before I personally pass judgement on how I feel about any new law.
That's the problem, isn't it. The push is for change NOW, not after looking at the facts. Gun control doesn't get passed because of the facts, it gets passed when emotions are running high and logic/facts are put on the back burner.

I strongly agree that the best course of action is to go about this in a systematic fashion, but it's looking more and more like that's not an option.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 10:26 PM   #130
Colorado Redneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2008
Location: Northeast Colorado
Posts: 1,510
Good opinion piece

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/10/05...egas-massacre/
This from the Denver Post which leans left most of the time.
Colorado Redneck is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 10:47 PM   #131
raimius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 1,766
I see a lot of people arguing that "we" should take a reasonable compromise...but I see no compromise here. The antis demand we ban more gun accessories. We don't get anything from that. It is not a compromise!

MetalGod, to answer your question from earlier, Miller was charged with possession of a SBS. SCOTUS ruled that the law could stand because they saw no evidence of such a firearm having utility in a militia (likely because the defense did not present a case, as Miller had vanished!)
raimius is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 12:47 AM   #132
Metal god
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 3,929
Quote:
I get the slippery slope argument
Here is Nancy Pallozzi's slippery slope comments today . Saying how she hopes it goes that way . She also goes on to say how she'll compromise by asking for back ground checks . The lol compromise is with others that want even more gun control . HOLY COW I actually can't believe she said that .

Hey Nancy ,
You compromise with the group that wants to do less or nothing in order to get there votes and that will allow something to pass . Not your own party which you already have there votes .

It's unbelievable how these people think . Well that made up my mind . I'm for NO new legislation or BATF regulations at this time .

Sorry could not find a quick Youtube video so you need to see the video here
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...e-gun-control/
__________________
Tolerate- allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of something that one does not necessarily like or agree with , without interference.
If you have some time IMO this is worth a listen/watch but it takes a few minutes to really get going .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USg3NR76XpQ&t=3265s or a picture of Mohamed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VwpwP_fIqY

Last edited by Metal god; October 6, 2017 at 01:26 AM.
Metal god is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 02:42 AM   #133
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 953
Why can't you believe it? People are ready to roll over for them on the bump stocks why not see what else you can get.

Feinstein after the 94 AWB said on camera she'd have taken them all (turn them all in mr, mrs America) but couldn't get the votes for that.

Nancy and Dianne are old time gun grabbers.. If her words today shocked you in the least you haven't been paying attention since like forever.

They've been gun grabbin since I was a wee tot.. And I ain't joking.. They are lifers.
__________________
NRA sold us out
This is America!, You have the right to be stupid.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 02:45 AM   #134
Rangerrich99
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2014
Location: Kinda near Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 741
First, not that it really matters, but I listened to three pieces of raw footage and found that on average is took Paddock about 10 seconds (sometimes about 9.7 sec. longest about 11.5) to unload a magazine. The six firing events I was able to listen to were pretty consistent about that; they were all right around 10 seconds. I believe the magazines pictured stacked neatly against that pillar are 50-rders, but I'm not sure. In the videos I was able to use, the shortest time between firing events was about 17 seconds. The longest time, which happened at least twice, was around 44 seconds. The shorter long interval was 37 seconds.

Second, just a little thought: I don't care about the bump stock; always thought it was a toy. And before tonight, I would've been just fine if the government decided to ban them.

(I had a paragraph here about Australia banning riflescopes, but after doing some research it seems my Australian buddy was incorrect, and therefore my post was in error. I've deleted it, so as not to misinform anyone else.)

However, after listening to a buddy that's from Australia and hearing about the extremely restrictive laws governing firearms, I really believe we should be careful about just rolling over and giving the gun control people whatever they want on this one. We should try to get something in exchange, IMO.

Last edited by Rangerrich99; October 6, 2017 at 06:15 PM.
Rangerrich99 is online now  
Old October 6, 2017, 02:55 AM   #135
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 5,711
Quote:
I see a lot of people arguing that "we" should take a reasonable compromise...but I see no compromise here. The antis demand we ban more gun accessories. We don't get anything from that. It is not a compromise!
You don't?!

You don't see ditching a "grown-up's toy" to make shooting a few hundred people harder to achieve as worthwhile, particularly if it means the focus is not on the semi-autos?

On a more general note:
Recognising that a handful of accessories can potentially do way more harm than they do good in giving some owners a few grins at the range is not a compromise, it's socially responsible and ultimately has nothing to do with RKBA.

RKBA is about buying and owning guns, and doing so unhindered.
It's not about gimmicks that may or may not go on such guns.

Put another way, would America's RKBA and enjoyment of firearms have been ruined if slide-fire stocks had never been invented...? I doubt it...
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!

Last edited by Pond, James Pond; October 6, 2017 at 03:03 AM.
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 03:22 AM   #136
jughead2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 28, 2008
Location: tenn.
Posts: 260
feinstein

as far as this old man is concerned NO MORE COMPROMISE. when we compromise we always lose something we already have. several years ago some anti-gun nut said we will not be able to ban guns all at once we will have to nibble at it a little at a time. that will probably get it done
jughead2 is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 03:36 AM   #137
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 953
@James

Surely even if the bump stock is nothing but a "grown ups" toy and who cares so just throw them a bone.

Do you not remember when the focus was on semi auto's? Do you honestly believe givin in and not putting up any sort of fight on bump stocks will end it all? do you think semi auto's wont again be the focus the next time someone uses one without a bump stock to commit a mass shooting?

Please tell you don't honestly believe this.

Does no one with that sort of mind set remember when they banned guns based on bayont lugs, pistol grips, vertical foregrips, flash suppressors, etc?

Is memory so short we don't remember the outcry of assault clips and rapid fire weapons of war ar15's after sandy hook and pretty much every other high profile shooting.

Says you been here since 2011, please tell me I got you figured wrong.
Please tell me, you don't think rolling over on bump stocks will take semi auto's off the ban menu.
__________________
NRA sold us out
This is America!, You have the right to be stupid.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 03:49 AM   #138
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 5,711
Quote:
Says you been here since 2011, please tell me I got you figured wrong.
Please tell me, you don't think rolling over on bump stocks will take semi auto's off the ban menu.
No I don't.

But, please tell me you don't honestly think bump-stocks are a RKBA issue. Think about what they are designed to do and when you might use them in a way that wouldn't end in jail time and tell me that.

All the examples you give are solid RKBA issues and were worthy of defence.

That is my point. People are getting all "2nd A/No compromise" over something that brings little, if anything, to the table in terms of what the RKBA is all about...

Just because something is connected with guns, doesn't make it a 2nd A issue. It may, but not by default.

I think you guys should save your lobby dollars for the issues that actually count and actually threaten your right to buy and keep guns, first and foremost. IMHO, where the voting public is concerned, fighting bump-stock restrictions given what has just happened would only weaken and sour the public opinion vis-a-vis the firearms community....

Who was it?
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose."
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 03:56 AM   #139
Metal god
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 3,929
Pond James , You are mixing arguments in my mind . First the RKBA was originally to protect the citizens from a tyrannical government . If you think those days are past . Just ask all these ANTIFA , BLM etc groups what's there problem , they got nothing to worry about just relax . It's my understanding anti gun people recently have bought more guns then ever before because of who's president and what they fear he could do . The RKBA is not just about being able to buy guns and go plink and I welcome them to the party .

Second , I've always considered the framers to be pretty smart . Do you think when writing the 2nd amendment they were thinking that technology would not improve the firearm ? The Militia or better said the ordinary citizen had in there homes the most powerful and modern weapons of the times . Yet some would try to make you believe the framers wanted firearms to stop evolving at some point and the citizens would have to make do with old technology .

Why do you think they excepted any citizen to own and or posses any weapon of the times but felt firearms in the future should be heavily regulated ? Citizens had canons for goodness sake . So why can't I have a little plastic thing on my firearm that helps me fire it faster . Last I checked ( in CA at least ) I can't have a canon , RPG , tank , jet fighter , full auto weapon , explosives , flash hider , center fire semi automatic rifle with both pistol grip and detachable magazine , I could go on . We seem pretty restricted/regulated here to me and that sure sounds like a lot of compromise by us and what did we get for all are compromising ? Oh that's right a slippery slope .

Have you ever read the cake analogy about the 2nd amendment ? It really fits here especially after what Nancy said yesterday .
https://www.reddit.com/r/progun/comm...d_on_facebook/

As far as me being surprised at what she said . It was not that she want's to get the guns that shocked me . It was her idea of compromise was compromising with the anti gunners and not with us pro gun folks . It just showed how backwards her thinking actually is .
__________________
Tolerate- allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of something that one does not necessarily like or agree with , without interference.
If you have some time IMO this is worth a listen/watch but it takes a few minutes to really get going .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USg3NR76XpQ&t=3265s or a picture of Mohamed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VwpwP_fIqY
Metal god is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 04:14 AM   #140
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 5,711
Quote:
Do you think when writing the 2nd amendment they were thinking that technology would not improve the firearm ?
Does a bump stock improve the gun it is fitted to?

Would you use it in a HD situation?

Does anyone ever advocate spray and pray for SD?

Is a bump-stock primarily recreational?

I think all of those, bar the last, are a "no". Feel free to correct me.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: The RKBA is a great thing. It was written in to protect the citizenry from tyranny and guns achieved that.

They no longer do. People think they do but they don't.

The courts are your defence against tyranny now because it is the courts who will decide if guns are taken away or not.

No one is actually going to take up arms against the government and no one on here would advocate that, despite all the "defence against tyranny" rhetoric. And any government that turned to tyranny would not do so before the public was disarmed and this would happen through the courts.

So you need to keep that system on side.

What the 2nd A still does is allow citizens to have the most effective self-defence at their disposal to protect their right to a peaceful life for themselves and their loved ones, free of unwarranted aggression. That, for me is as important, if not more so than the tyranny argument. Because it is more relevant on a day-today basis.

You guys have a number of resources at your disposal to do that in order to protect the 2nd A.

First the 2nd A itself. Robust, but not infallible. The FA ban proves that as do all the restrictions now in place in many states.

Then there is your vote. Having 2nd A friendly representatives in Congress etc will help you but as the old guard is replaced by the next generation who may be more removed from the types of values of existing Republicans (mostly) will they still be such stalwarts?

Then you have two more things that are in surprisingly limited supply: money for lobbying education and there is public opinion. Both those have their limits.

My view is you guys need to pick your fights very wisely...
And I don't think this is one of them.
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!

Last edited by Pond, James Pond; October 6, 2017 at 05:12 AM.
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 05:01 AM   #141
armoredman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,560
Mr Pond, I value your input and outsider perspective, as always well written and articulate, but I have to agree that to allow the anti rights crowd to ban an item because someone misused it once, is a bad thing, when untold numbers of civilians use this item without issue. I personally have less than no use for a bump fire stock. I will never own one - I prefer to be sure of where very bullet I fire is going. Most military I talk to say full auto on a rifle is wasteful and uncertain at best, and tend to keep rifles on semi auto so they can get as much out of each round as possible. Automatic fire is best kept to light and heavy machineguns. Having said that - full auto in a rifle or sub machine gun for civilian use is fun. Practical usefulness is very limited, but it is a lot of fun for those who can afford the toys and I don't begrudge them that fun. Bump fire stocks have the same lack of practical usefulness, but neither does my kid's game console. The ONLY use I could see for a bump fire stock in a defensive situation is in a militia style response to turn a heavier caliber rifle, such as an FAL into an ersatz LMG. That's it, under the 2A. Other than that, as useless as my wife's 80th pair of shoes in the giveaway box in the garage. But I will defend the right of people to keep a lawful product, despite it's usefulness, ( Kult of Athena sells lots of functional swords - I don't think they have much modern usefulness?), because it is lawful, the actions of one lone nutjob notwithstanding. IF it was true that an item once misused to cause death and destruction should be banned, then all box cutters would have been tightly regulated after 9/11.
As for people here quite comfortable with banning semi auto rifles, banning normal capacity magazines, I'm sorry, fair weather friend and sunshine patriots is not what we need now. As stated above, these things are often rushed through as fast as possible so cooler heads will not prevail, the calm cool logic overwhelmed with heated emotion, "DO something NOW"...regardless of what good or harm it may do.
For those with the militia argument, Heller divorced the clearly stated right from service in the militia, so that holds no water, nor the assentation that the National Guard is the militia - it isn't. But it also doesn't matter.
However this goes, it is going to be fast, bumpy, loud and shrill on all sides, with much heat and smoke being cast about. I, for one, am glad Mrs Clinton is not in the White House, because the end of this would be far, far worse for everyone. The quote about riflescopes in Australia is spot on, when you remember that she openly admired the Australian style of unilateral personal disarmament.
I would be happy to avoid that. I may dislike your bump fire stock, but I will defend your right to legally own and operate it.
armoredman is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 05:06 AM   #142
shooterdownunder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 28, 2013
Location: sydney
Posts: 133
Quote:
But earlier tonight I was speaking with a buddy I know that is from Australia. He was giving me the usual what-for about how we need to ban all guns, blah blah blah and so on, when he mentioned that rifle scopes are banned in Australia since the Port Arthur massacre. RIFLESCOPES.

Martin Bryant (I.Q. 66, couldn't read or write) managed to somehow hit two moving targets at over 1300 yards with a scoped rifle, and the Australian government decided the best course of action was to ban riflescopes along with every thing else.
What? I think your buddy has had a bit too much to drink. Scopes are in no way banned here.
shooterdownunder is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 05:57 AM   #143
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 5,711
Quote:
Mr Pond, I value your input and outsider perspective, as always well written and articulate,
Thank you.

Quote:
As stated above, these things are often rushed through as fast as possible so cooler heads will not prevail, the calm cool logic overwhelmed with heated emotion, "DO something NOW"...regardless of what good or harm it may do.
I have no problem with cool-headedness. I encourage it.

Way too much legislation is rushed through. But that need for cool-headedness extends to people's rejection of a motion as well as those advocating it.

I'm simply saying think carefully and principles aside, you (the pro RKBA community) do need to be pragmatic. I feel that what you (the pro RKBA community) see as a principled stance could morph to into looking like intransigence by the wider public.

Ultimately, you'll each have to decide if this is worth the potential fall out.

For what it's worth, I think the NRA should be proactive and pump money into some transparent, independent, peer-review research into common features in acts of mass-violence (not just guns). States-side and abroad. Perhaps also a review of the media culture that feeds the troll of mass-violence.

Otherwise it will only ever be a reactionary organisation, dancing to other people's tunes...
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 06:55 AM   #144
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 6,983
Quote:
I think you guys should save your lobby dollars for the issues that actually count and actually threaten your right to buy and keep guns, first and foremost. IMHO, where the voting public is concerned, fighting bump-stock restrictions given what has just happened would only weaken and sour the public opinion vis-a-vis the firearms community
The NRA doesn't need to spend money here. Gun legislation doesn't even get a vote unless not just one; but two different people that the NRA declared were our nearest and most stalwart allies - people who stood by us through Newtown - allow it to get a vote. And for legislation to actually pass, the odds are much worse - and then it would have to be signed by our stalwart pro-Second Amendment President.

So you see, THERE WAS NO FIGHT TO LOSE. It was just the usual whiners doing the usual whining. Loudly whining, sure; but still whining. Now, we have a fight. Now, the other side correctly interpreted the NRA's actions as weakness and is going to attack full force, using the NRA's own idiot statement as their banner. Meanwhile, people are tossing their NRA memberships over this, so now the NRA is losing money as it opens up a fight it didn't even need to have.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 07:22 AM   #145
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 5,711
Quote:
The NRA doesn't need to spend money here. Gun legislation doesn't even get a vote unless not just one; but two different people that the NRA declared were our nearest and most stalwart allies - people who stood by us through Newtown - allow it to get a vote.
What happens when those two decide this is more than their re-election chances are worth and let it go to a vote?

What happens when they lose their election because they backed a policy that was frowned upon by the public, be it sound or not?

I mean, I hope you're right. I hope it is not going to snow-ball. I hope they find out this guy's motives and hope they realise that he could have just stolen an 18-wheeler and ploughed though the gates just as easily and killed just as many, if not more. That this is a question of motive and willingness on his part to do something hideous, rather than the means by which he did them.

But I have my reservations.... as pointed out earlier, the "find a solution" mentality of the public these days doesn't allow for the very real fact that sometimes there is nothing you can do and outlier events do happen, against the odds.

As for bailing on the NRA over this, I think that would be biting one's nose to spite one's face. Again, in the grand scheme of RKBA things, this is not a central issue. It is, however, a major issue in the court of public opinion, IMHO.
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!

Last edited by Pond, James Pond; October 6, 2017 at 07:48 AM.
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 07:46 AM   #146
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 6,983
The court of public opinion is BS. If you lived through the pre-Internet era of gun rights, you long ago learned to ignore what you were being told was "public opinion" on gun issues. This is just straight up propaganda trying to shape public opinion at this stage.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 07:46 AM   #147
5whiskey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 2,431
Quote:
No one is actually going to take up arms against the government and no one on here would advocate that, despite all the "defence against tyranny" rhetoric. And any government that turned to tyranny would not do so before the public was disarmed and this would happen through the courts.
Your bolded text is precisely the purpose of this...

Quote:
The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.
While it is attributed to Thomas Jefferson, I think the claim is quite dubious. Regardless of it's origin, it is somewhat true.

I will not advocate taking up arms against the government unless things are radically worse than they are now in the States. Currently, our SCOTUS decisions are still honored by the government, even when the government gets it's hand slapped by SCOTUS. SCOTUS decisions HAVE been ignored in the past. Abraham Lincoln ignored an order from the SCOTUS and suspended Habeas Corpus rights in 1861. That same president said this...

Quote:
We think [the Court's] decisions on constitutional questions, when fully settled, should control, not only the particular cases decided, but the general policy of the country, subject to be disturbed only by amendments of the Constitution as provided in that instrument itself. More than this would be revolution.
He was spot on there. If we reach the point that SCOTUS decisions were ignored by the executive and legislative branch, IMO, that would signal the justification of an actual armed conflict against the government in our nation if there were no other means to redress our greviences. Until then, the Tyranny argument is in fact bravado. But armed conflict against an existing government has occurred many many times throughout history. To believe that it could not, or would not, happen again (even in a civilized nation) is a dangerous thought. When we begin to sincerely believe that, as a whole, then our governments already have the power to do whatever they want to us.


Even with all of this, the bump fire stock would not make physical resistance against the government any more effective. Not to mention the point is often made that citizens would have to fight against tanks and helicopters... but who honestly doesn't believe that the Military is comprised of citizens who very well may turn the government's own hardware against it. All of this is moot, conjecture, and speaks to a remote hypothetical future possibility that I pray we never see. None-the-less, a strong Second Amendment makes this possibility all the less likely, and that's why it is important to preserve it.

Last edited by 5whiskey; October 6, 2017 at 08:09 AM.
5whiskey is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 07:50 AM   #148
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 5,711
Quote:
Your bolded text is precisely the purpose of this...
I understand this. It might be its purpose, but that doesn't mean it works in the way intended.

But don't think it is your guns stopping them...
It is the judiciary and their interpretation of the law.
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 07:51 AM   #149
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 5,711
Quote:
This is just straight up propaganda trying to shape public opinion at this stage.
And that door swings both ways.

It just so happens, IMHO, only the anti-gun lobby uses it effectively these days.

From what I've seen (and it is limited, I'll grant you...) NRA spends way too much time preaching to the converted.

Also I'd wager that the public view on many things may have changed in the last 30 years...
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!

Last edited by Pond, James Pond; October 6, 2017 at 08:01 AM.
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old October 6, 2017, 07:53 AM   #150
zipspyder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 13, 2017
Posts: 292
The NRA threw them a bone with something that is gimmicky anyway. Bigger things to worry about.
zipspyder is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10988 seconds with 9 queries