[johnny7]

“... I'm not anti-gun. I think soldiers, the police and certain other law enforcement officials should have guns. Civilians, however... ”

I get it now! It's the stupid civilians.

[PuNcH]

The National Rifle Association doesn't call it an enemies list, but deep in the recesses of the organization's Web site is a long, long compilation of the names of groups and individuals that the N.R.A. considers unfriendly.

I'm sure there's a method to the N.R.A. madness, but to tell you the truth, all I can see is the madness.

All of the groups and individuals listed are supposed to be anti-gun. I can't speak for the Kansas City Chiefs or Moon Zappa, but I'm not anti-gun. - blithers Bob Herbert

You are anti 2nd amendment. What the list is for, dumbass, is to avoid supporting or spending money towards those that would like to attack our constitutional rights. So you can stop boggling over the obvious now.

[Gunner Mike]

40 Reasons For Gun Control
Significant portions of this article are excerpted from Michael Z. Williamson's excellent and witty piece, "It's amazing what one has to believe to believe in gun control"

1. Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, & Chicago cops need guns.

2. Washington DC's low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Indianapolis' high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.

3. Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are "just statistics."

4. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates, which have been declining since 1991.

5. We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.

6. The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.

7. An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.

8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

9. When confronted by violent criminals, you should "put up no defense -- give them what they want, or run" (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don't Die - People Do, 1981, p.125).

10. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns & Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.

11. One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seatbelts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for internal medicine, a computer programmer for hard drive problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.

12. The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later, in 1917.

13. The National Guard, federally funded, with bases on federal land, using federally-owned weapons, vehicles, buildings and uniforms, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a "state" militia.

14. These phrases: "right of the people peaceably to assemble," "right of the people to be secure in their homes," "enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people," and "The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people" all refer to individuals, but "the right of the people to keep and bear arm" refers to the state.

15. "The Constitution is strong and will never change." But we should ban and seize all guns thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments to that Constitution.

16. Rifles and handguns aren't necessary to national defense! Of course, the army has hundreds of thousands of them.

17. Private citizens shouldn't have handguns, because they aren't "military weapons", but private citizens shouldn't have "assault rifles", because they are military weapons.

18. In spite of waiting periods, background checks, finger printing, government forms, etc., guns today are too readily available, which is responsible for recent school shootings. In the 1940's, 1950's and1960's, anyone could buy guns at hardware stores, army surplus stores, gas stations, variety stores, Sears mail order, no waiting, no background check, no fingerprints, no government forms and there were no school shootings.

19. The NRA's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, but the anti-gun lobby's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign is responsible social activity.

20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.

21. A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.

22. Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is "an accident waiting to happen" and gun makers' advertisements aimed at women are "preying on their fears."

23. Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.

24. Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.

25. A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.

26. Any self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a "weapon of mass destruction" or an "assault weapon."

27. Most people can't be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.

28. The right of Internet pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.

29. Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self-defense only justifies bare hands.

30. The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it defends other parts of the Constitution.

31. Charlton Heston, a movie actor as president of the NRA is a cheap lunatic who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas, a movie actor as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.

32. Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do "civilians" who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.

33. We should ban "Saturday Night Specials" and other inexpensive guns because it's not fair that poor people have access to guns too.

34. Police officers have some special Jedi-like mastery over hand guns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.

35. Private citizens don't need a gun for self-protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.

36. Citizens don't need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators who work in a building filled with cops, need a gun.

37. "Assault weapons" have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people. The police need assault weapons. You do not.

38. When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that's bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that's good.

39. Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you see police officers with one on their duty weapon.

40. Handgun Control, Inc. says they want to "keep guns out of the wrong hands." Guess what? You have the wrong hands.

[MissAmericanPie]

So it's not true that all men put their pants on one leg at a time. This author proves that some men, liberals, wear their pants on their head, their belts cutting off circulation to the brain. I've always suspected as much.

[sergeantdave]

I sorta fall in with the liberals on gun control - if you have to load your weapon onto a trailer and hook it up to a semi-truck or locomotive to move it, individuals should not be allowed to own such armament.

[fightu4it]

It makes no difference what your name is, and it makes no difference what kind of sweet sounding, mom and apple pie name you give your organization.

If you choose to ignore my 2nd amendment rights, I can, and do choose to ignore your 1st amendment rights.

See how that works? It's really quite simple.

[sandydipper]

What part of the second ammendment don't these idiots understand. The single thing that stands between "us" and the government is the governments knowledge that "us" is armed.

[boris]

I tried to go to stopthenra.com to ask to be added to their enemies list but I could not find a way to do so.

They appear to be just a tenticle of the Brady bunch and the "Million Mom March"...

--Boris

[boris]

"Civilians, however, should be required to demonstrate a good reason for having firearms."

Here's a good reason: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

--Boris

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

“... I'm not anti-press. I think the military , the police and certain other government officials should have the right to publish the news. Civilians, however... ”

[Travis McGee]

"Road to civil war" ping.

"I'm not anti-gun. I think soldiers, the police and certain other law enforcement officials should have guns. Civilians, however, should be required to demonstrate [to the government] a good reason for having firearms."

[Tribune7]

I'm not anti-gun. I think soldiers, the police and certain other law enforcement officials should have guns.

Bob, you make a great point. You're are not anti-gun. You are anti-Constitution.

[grumple]

I stopped reading here...

Civilians, however, should be required to demonstrate a good reason for having firearms.

Who determines what is "good reason"? Thanks for lumping honest law abiding citizens who use their own "good reason" and sound judgement as compared to thugs and criminals who could care less about anyone's definition of "good reason"

One thing is for sure though...the criminal who could care less about "good reason", has one thing in common with the sound judgement minded individual at least...he's more than likely a "civilian".

And what about the folks who so thoughtfully determine "good reason" for those of us who exercise "sound judgement when owning a firearm....are they any less of a criminal? And if so, how do they determine and/or demonstrate "good reason"?

[in the Arena]

I think soldiers, the police and certain other law enforcement officials should have guns. Civilians, however, should be required to demonstrate a good reason for having firearms.

Police are civilians...

[archy]

I think soldiers, the police and certain other law enforcement officials should have guns. Civilians, however, should be required to demonstrate a good reason for having firearms.

Thanks for nothing, Mr Herbert.

[MarkL]

The reason that the KC Chiefs and BC & BS of KC is on the list is the fact that they publicly opposed the CCW law in Mo.

I wrote a letter to Lamar Hunt telling him that I would never attend another Chiefs gate. I love football, and the Chiefs, but I'll never step foot in Arrowhead Stadium again, and it irks me that some of my taxes go to the Chiefs organization.

Mark

[Spok]

When liberals do this, it's called a boycott. When conservatives do it, it's an enemies list. This kind of doublethink spin reveals their lack of serious arguments.

[unixfox]

I'm not anti-gun. I think soldiers, the police and certain other law enforcement officials should have guns.

Good little serfs usually get what they deserve.

[Publius6961]

All of the groups and individuals listed are supposed to be anti-gun. I can't speak for the Kansas City Chiefs or Moon Zappa, but I'm not anti-gun. I think soldiers, the police and certain other law enforcement officials should have guns. Civilians, however, should be required to demonstrate a good reason for having firearms. We should go to great lengths to keep guns out of the hands of children, criminals and insane people. All guns should be registered. And all gun owners should be properly trained and licensed. The N.R.A. sees this as a radical, even lunatic position. So I guess we're at odds.

Interesting, Bob.
You are not anti gun. But any rational semieducated individual can't help to infer from this article that indeed, that is what you are.
If we didn't have a Constitution, the particular paragraph above would make sense. Fortunately, we do have a Constitution and its language is quite simple and clear. No "demostration of a good reason to have guns" is required. At least the Founding Fathers saw that as so self-evident as not to merit attention.

Playing devils advocate, I will agree that "demonstration of a good reason to own a gun" is necessary.
The fact that police departments at every level have told us that they have neither the ability nor the obligation to protect us from an increasingly growing violent criminal subgroup, most would agree constitutes "good reason", and is a universal right: protection of ones life and ones family.

So yeah. We're at odds. Big time.

"That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -- GEORGE ORWELL

[chudogg]

The N.R.A. Web site and its enemies list (which looks like nothing so much as a broad cross-section of America) has led inevitably to a counter Web site, nrablacklist.com

Damn, i went to that website and wanted to see what, if any, celebrities that they would put on their list, but of course they didnt have any.

[citizenx7]

I get it now, its not the governments of the world that have disarmed their civilians, and then proceded to kill at least 170,000,000 of them, after they are defenseless, that should be brought under control! Its the few remaining 'civilians' (mostly in the United States), that should be brought under control, and disarmed. That makes a lot of sense...

I think that most on Free Republic understand this, but for those that don't quite get it, I highly recommend the newly released documentary, put out by JPFO ( www.jpfo.org ).
I just received a copy this weekend, and it will help anyone that has any misgivings about the legal and moral necessity to keep the right to self defense. Its called: "Innocents Betrayed".