Does The NRA Represent Sane Gun Owners Anymore?

[Galloism]

It's also nonsensical that a phrase without a limiting clause should be read as having a limiting clause, but here you are.

Regardless, we are still using our militia to maintain national security. We could hypothetically do something else, but so could the founding fathers, and if that's the case, than the 2nd amendment itself should be written off as having no meaning at any point in all of history. I want to recognize an explanation clause as an explanation clause - you want to write off the whole amendment literally since the moment it was written.



Except he'd have to authorize each deployment. If an airliner was hijacked or there was an aircraft on a suspicious course, ATC couldn't call the national guard for an intercept, they would have to call the white house, wake up the president, get him to directly authorize such action, and THEN aircraft could be deployed on an intercept.

The time delay could be critical.

the time delay is an inconvenience, but it won't render the mission impossible

hence its not necessary to have a militia

Disastrously critical, depending on the distance from the aircraft to the target. It could very well be the difference between a tragedy and a national tragedy.

the limiting clause is in the operational part of the text, right before the first comma

Then you should have no problem pointing out the temporal or conditional preposition in the text.

[Regias]

Getting back to the original point I believe the poster was trying to make...

As a firearms owner living in the U.S, as well as an avid student of both the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence (chuck Common Sense in there as well, many fine points about the dangers of government abuses), and I must say this; though I am a member of the NRA and have been for a few years now, I do not believe that they fully represent my interests as a responsible firearms owner any longer. Yes, there are some things that they have lobbied for or against that I desired, but their overall attitude towards what many similar firearm owners believe to be common sense law reform is appalling.

It is my belief that they could score far more points among most political parties, Republican and Democrat alike, if they were to back mandatory weapons safety/training classes legislation, and also a mandatory minimum waiting period of at least 5 days for ANY firearms purchase, unless a court order or some form of writ of protection is given to the person seeking a weapon. That would be an extreme circumstance. I bought a handgun some years back, and after the background check cleared and my payment given, I was handed the weapon. No waiting, no fuss. That frightens the hell out of me. A waiting period might have the effect of forcing someone who is hot-headed and about to commit a murder to take some time, cool down, and think about what they're going to do. Maybe that's naive, but maybe I like to think that people can still be rational even at the worst moments in their lives. It took me some doing, but I managed to be.

Let me be clear though; I do not and WILL NOT support bans of any kind. I do not and WILL NOT support mandatory buybacks, or door-to-door confiscations. That's just going to lead to a lot of needless bloodshed, both police and civilian.

[Republic of Coldwater]

Unequivocally advocating for the right to bear arms, even if that means opposing the gun control act of 68 or the NFA does not represent insanity, but as a very pro gun person, the NRA does do some relatively insane things.

[Galloism]

Fair point on that - regarding the NRA, i've gotten rather... skeptical in recent years.

i've been a member of the NRA for over a decade but more and more they seem to be more about spreading fear than supporting the second amendment. We have had the greatest gun rights rally in history with the dual decisions of dc v. heller and mcdonald v. chicago. We should be happy.

Not scared.

[Blorbs]

Hmm...

[Republic of Coldwater]

Fair point on that - regarding the NRA, i've gotten rather... skeptical in recent years.

i've been a member of the NRA for over a decade but more and more they seem to be more about spreading fear than supporting the second amendment. We have had the greatest gun rights rally in history with the dual decisions of dc v. heller and mcdonald v. chicago. We should be happy.

Not scared.

While the NRA has become a fear-inducing, not legitimate gun rights group, we still have work to do in order to uphold the second amendment. We have the Gun Control Act of 68, the NFA of 34 and the machine gun ban in 85, alongside various bans on ammunition types. Those are clear violations of the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

[Blorbs]

Fair point on that - regarding the NRA, i've gotten rather... skeptical in recent years.

i've been a member of the NRA for over a decade but more and more they seem to be more about spreading fear than supporting the second amendment. We have had the greatest gun rights rally in history with the dual decisions of dc v. heller and mcdonald v. chicago. We should be happy.

Not scared.

While the NRA has become a fear-inducing, not legitimate gun rights group, we still have work to do in order to uphold the second amendment. We have the Gun Control Act of 68, the NFA of 34 and the machine gun ban in 85, alongside various bans on ammunition types. Those are clear violations of the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

However, the right to bear arms is very, very debatable on how far it goes, considering the technology they had when that was written, so whether or not those are violations of the second ammendment cannot, by definition, be clear violations. Possibly something that has a large amount of reasoning behind its clearness, but not entirely clear.

[Second Blazing]

The NRA, despite their insane rhetoric, does a lot of good in communities. The firearms safety course that I took when I was 11 was an NRA course. Without the NRA, millions of Americans would not be able to legally hunt, the hunting license fees from which are one of the largest contributors to conservation projects nationwide.

[Grunberg-Ludbach]

Some NRA members and officials are a bit insane and nutty, but as a whole, the group is demonized a bit too much.

[Themiclesia]

I don't see why there shouldn't be a nanny state, especially when guns are dangerous in the wrong hands. Any error associated with it could be fatal, and that is too great a price to pay for an empty sense of freedom.

Because everything is dangerous in the wrong hands. Life is dangerous whether you're responsible or not.


Maybe it's just my edgy rebellious ways, but I feel like your average adult is capable of making their own life choices.

And almost everything else has a legitimate, non-harmful effect when used in the intended way.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Because everything is dangerous in the wrong hands. Life is dangerous whether you're responsible or not.


Maybe it's just my edgy rebellious ways, but I feel like your average adult is capable of making their own life choices.

And almost everything else has a legitimate, non-harmful effect when used in the intended way.

Same with guns.

[Themiclesia]

And almost everything else has a legitimate, non-harmful effect when used in the intended way.

Same with guns.

Not quite. Not all things have been designed to maximize damage to humans.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Same with guns.

Not quite. Not all things have been designed to maximize damage to humans.

Many people consider guns 1) fun to use 2) fun to collect 3) historically interesting and 4) useful for hunting.

Among the general populace, that basically covers the vast majority of gun owners.

[Narland]

Anytime you get a group of more than 500 people the fringe factor sets in. Larger organizations attract fringe worthy disproportionally to its size, scope, and power--just look at Congress. An organization with at least a couple million (perhaps 4.5 million) members like the NRA is going to have some crazy stuff going on.

In any large powerful organization, the problem isn't necessarily the people, but some people's crazy ideas. Crazy ideas are best countered with sane, rational arguments that convince and persuade otherwise. Of course, the best persuasion against the criminal and the tyrant (neither tend to listen well to reason) is a well armed people which is what the NRA is for.

The 2nd Amendment recognizes the right to self-protection and it serves to secure every other right against tyrannical government or other criminal elements in society by the use of arms, and in the formation of a militia if need be. As long as the NRA continues as a civil rights organization educating people as to the intents, meaning, and purpose of the 2nd amendment of the Bill of Rights and encouraging the bearing arms lawfully and responsibly they will have many Americans' support. In the rare event that the NRA goes off the deep end the members will drop it until it gets back on track; go to some other group, or form their own groups that best represent their cause.

[USS Monitor]

I'm not willing to entertain that possibility. And black powder ingested is still a harmful substance, if the primer falls out.

Now the stock might fall off, the bullet fall out, and then someone accidentally eat the bullet so we need to ban guns in public?

It feels like I am reading one of Infected Mushroom's threads.

I mean, there are reasonable arguments that can be made for gun control, but what Themiclesia's doing in this thread is not the way to go about it. Next thing you know they will be saying we need to ban goldfish because they are a choking hazard.

[USS Monitor]

Same with guns.

Not quite. Not all things have been designed to maximize damage to humans.

Not all guns are intended for use against humans.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Now the stock might fall off, the bullet fall out, and then someone accidentally eat the bullet so we need to ban guns in public?

It feels like I am reading one of Infected Mushroom's threads.

I mean, there are reasonable arguments that can be made for gun control, but what Themiclesia's doing in this thread is not the way to go about it. Next thing you know they will be saying we need to ban goldfish because they are a choking hazard.

I guess how much of a choking hazard they are depends on how big you let them grow before you try to eat them.

[Imperializt Russia]

One could argue that the National Guard isn't very "militia-ish" these days, it's very much a standing force. It has F-15s and F-16s and A-10s and Abrams and Pattons and M16s by the million and will probably receive F-22 and F-35 aircraft one day.

It's very specifically defined as the militia by the militia act of 1903, and still maintains forces in a very militia like way. I think they're still doing the 1 weekend a month 2 weeks a year thing, where people do a little bit of militia work but they're mainly a plumber.

Or whatever.

Much like the USMC is vastly oversized for what it ostensibly does due to political reasons, the NG is vastly overcapable for a "militia" for the same. Militia could be argued that it's simply a continuation of the revolutionary spirit, considering that in practice it's just a state-local Army Reserve (when compared to similar forces in other countries, and still overmatched compared to those) with its own air force, tank brigades and probably a naval force (unless the USCG has that role for them).

[The Solonian Empire]

Security does not refer only to invasion. The militia still acts in areas of natural disaster and domestic crisis, and maintains the security of our domestic airspace. Reacting properly to such things is part of maintaining our national security.

The military is generally not permitted to intervene on US soil.

One could argue that the National Guard isn't very "militia-ish" these days, it's very much a standing force. It has F-15s and F-16s and A-10s and Abrams and Pattons and M16s by the million and will probably receive F-22 and F-35 aircraft one day.

American Internal Troops for the win.

[Galloism]

It's very specifically defined as the militia by the militia act of 1903, and still maintains forces in a very militia like way. I think they're still doing the 1 weekend a month 2 weeks a year thing, where people do a little bit of militia work but they're mainly a plumber.

Or whatever.

Much like the USMC is vastly oversized for what it ostensibly does due to political reasons, the NG is vastly overcapable for a "militia" for the same. Militia could be argued that it's simply a continuation of the revolutionary spirit, considering that in practice it's just a state-local Army Reserve (when compared to similar forces in other countries, and still overmatched compared to those) with its own air force, tank brigades and probably a naval force (unless the USCG has that role for them).

Actually, one of the reasons the NG is "overcapable" is that they can act merely on the governor's say so. This devolves power somewhat, giving the NG the ability to react much more quickly than the US army.

Now, they're also not as well equipped as the army/air force etc, because they're doing a fundamentally different job. The Raptor is not a very useful aircraft for the NG, given they have no need of stealth. Typically, NG flight ops is intercepting airplanes over US soil, where all radar is friendly. The F-15 is faster and has a better time to climb, so it's more useful for that purpose (not that I'm saying they'll never be handed F-22s. The fact that something's stupid has never made it not happen.)

In any case, they're defined specifically as the militia by federal law, and thanks to DC v. Heller, constitutionally, all men of able body and appropriate age are in the unorganized militia.

[Big Jim P]

Relevant op-ed article.

One of the most common mistakes for the polimedia* class in this country is that they inhabit a very insular world, and they have begun to believe their own propaganda. In this instance, they sincerely believe the lie they’ve constructed that the NRA is nothing more than a lobbying organization for gun manufacturers, “intent on concocting fears to sell guns.”

They don’t grasp—and indeed, are perhaps intentionally avoiding admitting to themselves— that the NRA isn’t a gun industry organization (that’s the NSSF), but a massive civil rights organization driven by, responsive to, and made up of perfectly normal American citizens. There are more than five million members of the NRA, and the stance of this organization heavily influences the voting patterns of tens of millions more citizens, and that is where they draw their power.

The NRA isn’t a top-down organization telling it’s followers what to think.

The NRA is the nation’s most successful grassroots citizen’s community, and has appointed some trusted people to act on behalf of millions of voices.

The power of the NRA doesn’t come from Wayne LaPierre. It comes from the tens of millions of gun owners that he defends with such fire against dishonest and craven attacks from elitists that imagine themselves to be better and smarter than the Founding Fathers themselves.

The NRA defends freedoms that the radical left wing that has taken over the top of the Democrat Party continually assault.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Same with guns.

Not quite. Not all things have been designed to maximize damage to humans.

Such an uneducated and ignorant viewpoint you are expressing here.

I must be doing something very wrong, as the vast majority of firearms in my collection were never designed with any intent of maximizing damage to human beings.

[Neu Leonstein]

The US gun debate is not exactly a place for reasoned debate - hyperbole is the only language being spoken.

You sig is a good example.

How come? I actually thought it was a pretty level-headed, if obviously resigned, assessment. Mass shootings don't happen with that sort of frequency in other places, and we know why that is. But for a number of reasons US society does not want to be the same as other developed countries in that respect, and I've explained my take on why I think that is. And that's really all anyone can do. It's obvious that in the US the debate is such that the trade-off between gun rights and gun violence is treated differently than elsewhere, and given this, how is it hyperbole to say that gun violence is a fact of life one just has to learn to live with if one lives in the US?

[Paddy O Fernature]

You sig is a good example.

How come? I actually thought it was a pretty level-headed...

Stopped reading riiiiight about here, as it's pretty clear what direction that was headed.

[Neu Leonstein]

Stopped reading riiiiight about here, as it's pretty clear what direction that was headed.

And you needed this post just to tell me that you didn't read my post?