Posted on 04/24/2007 7:46:30 PM PDT by neverdem
They informed me about the Lautenberg Abomination before it passed, unlike the NRA which didn't inform members about it until many months afterward.
Talk is cheap.
I get emails from the NRA all the time. Sometimes every day. Chances are, they probably had the information on their website and I didn’t read it. Maybe the information was in one of those mailings everyone is too lazy to throw away without whining about it.
Like I said, the GOA is worthless.
After finding out about the legislation, I deliberately looked to see if the NRA mentioned it. It was only after months of looking that I first found any mention of it from the NRA.
Of course, the NRA couldn't very well threaten action against any congresscritters who passed this legislation after their Board of Directors statement asking people to do anything possible to unelect Clinton even though Dole wasn't worthy of endorsement. And once the Lautenberg Abomination passed, the NRA didn't want to admit how many A-rated congresscritters had voted for it.
The Second Amendment protects all of the others.
Maybe your letter was lost in the mail? Maybe you went to the NRA website instead of the NRA-ILA website? Maybe you threw out that mailing and complained all the way to the garbage can?
So you went back to 1986 to find something in which the NRA backed away. Why didn’t the GOA stop it if they are so powerful and uncompromising?
GOA members have nothing to base their support so they slam the NRA.
Again, the GOA is worthless.
The Lautenberg Abomination was 1996, not 1986; I'll assume a typo on your part.
I was severely miffed about the Lautenberg Abomination at the time, and their current stance with regard to 'mental health' background checks seems to fit the same pattern.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Is that you Sara?
Sorry, but I`m not convinced. I do think that the backround check has taken much of the arguement away from the anti`s which was the idea in the first place.
Sometimes the truth hurts. We have all known folks that would rather be the Captain of the Titanic then the First Mate on the rescue boat.
From my cold dead hands, lol. It doesn’t matter what law is passed or how it is enforced. No one can take my weapons from me. Sure, they can try to take the registered one but that’s about it.
Other than the right given in the 2nd Amendment. Everyone should be armed imo. I value the police/Law enforcement. But they can’t be everywhere and I refuse to wait until they show up for my protection. By then it’s usually too late. I will never go out without a fight. I won’t rely on our government to protect us or our police to protect us.
Yep we are on dangerous ground here. All a court has to do is declare someone a danger to themselves or others, and there go your gun rights. A person who is a danger to themselves or others should not be on the street but should be in jail or an institution.
Yep we are on dangerous ground here. All a court has to do is declare someone a danger to themselves or others, and there go your gun rights. A person who is a danger to themselves or others should not be on the street but should be in jail or an institution.
Several things, the difference between a right and a privilege isn't a word game it is a significant difference, that's why the words are different. They mean different things, and if you don't understand the difference, I suggest you apply that same logic to the right of free speech and see how that would play out. Secondly, why don't you tell me what good a background check does since you seem to like gun control so much. Third, It is extraordinarily arrogant of you to tell me what the founders meant in light of George Mason's, Thomas Jefferson's, etc. words. Fourth,your bullsh!t straw man is TOTALLY irrelevant. Up until 1968 ANYONE, even if they had just gotten out of jail that morning could walk into a hardware store, Sears, Wards, etc and buy a gun - no questions asked, and guess what? The overall crime levels were LOWER then than now. Fifth, I despise trolls. This used to be a CONSERVATIVE forum, and supporting gun control is not a conservative action (although it is an NRA action).
They make the trembling Lib's FEEL better!
How about no prior restraint laws, and punishing people for crimes that they commit?
That’d make too much sense and actually be effective. Remember: No politician gains from a problem solved.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.