Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2018 13:17:00 GMT -5
If they promoted gun safety they'd want more background checks and other commense sense gun control that the vast majority of the country wants. They oppose it all You misunderstand the NRA. The NRA is interested in teaching gun safety for the person shooting the gun. The NRA couldn't care less about the people the guy is shooting at. They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time. Not to be out done by Mike's triple down, in rushes Wally wearing a cape to quadruple down on the stupidity. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by kaz on Mar 6, 2018 13:19:00 GMT -5
If they promoted gun safety they'd want more background checks and other commense sense gun control that the vast majority of the country wants. They oppose it all You misunderstand the NRA. The NRA is interested in teaching gun safety for the person shooting the gun. The NRA couldn't care less about the people the guy is shooting at. They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time. Wow. I wasn't sure we'd ever see the day, but it looks like Mike finally has some real competition... |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by bamorin on Mar 6, 2018 13:47:06 GMT -5
They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time. well, the venerable model 97 an 12 have been out of production a long time |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by bamorin on Mar 6, 2018 13:49:15 GMT -5
You misunderstand the NRA. The NRA is interested in teaching gun safety for the person shooting the gun. The NRA couldn't care less about the people the guy is shooting at. They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time. Wow. I wasn't sure we'd ever see the day, but it looks like Mike finally has some real competition... Stupidity in the 21st century is spreading faster than the Spanish flu of the early 20th..........obvious it's contagious |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on Mar 6, 2018 16:28:46 GMT -5
You misunderstand the NRA. The NRA is interested in teaching gun safety for the person shooting the gun. The NRA couldn't care less about the people the guy is shooting at. They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time. Wow. I wasn't sure we'd ever see the day, but it looks like Mike finally has some real competition... Yeah, because I got it all wrong... "“The NRA opposes the Feinstein and Curbelo legislation,” Jennifer Baker, the director of public affairs for the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, told The Hill, referencing legislation in both chambers."thehill.com/regulation/355183-nra-comes-out-against-legislation-banning-bump-stocksDid I write this? "...They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time...."Oh....yeah....I did. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by bamorin on Mar 6, 2018 17:28:45 GMT -5
Wow. I wasn't sure we'd ever see the day, but it looks like Mike finally has some real competition... Yeah, because I got it all wrong... "“The NRA opposes the Feinstein and Curbelo legislation,” Jennifer Baker, the director of public affairs for the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, told The Hill, referencing legislation in both chambers."thehill.com/regulation/355183-nra-comes-out-against-legislation-banning-bump-stocksDid I write this? "...They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time...."Oh....yeah....I did. (FAIRFAX, VA) - The National Rifle Association today issued the following statement: "In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks. This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans' Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence." You're a bit confused........as is the writer of the article you cited. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on Mar 6, 2018 17:44:00 GMT -5
Yeah, because I got it all wrong... "“The NRA opposes the Feinstein and Curbelo legislation,” Jennifer Baker, the director of public affairs for the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, told The Hill, referencing legislation in both chambers."thehill.com/regulation/355183-nra-comes-out-against-legislation-banning-bump-stocksDid I write this? "...They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time...."Oh....yeah....I did. (FAIRFAX, VA) - The National Rifle Association today issued the following statement: "In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks. This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans' Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence." You're a bit confused........as is the writer of the article you cited. Apparently, banning bump stocks was way more "additional regulation" than they had in mind. They opposed the legislation to ban them after issuing a statement supporting vague, unspecified, "additional regulation". That don't cut it. My statement: "They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time." still stands. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by bamorin on Mar 6, 2018 17:54:04 GMT -5
(FAIRFAX, VA) - The National Rifle Association today issued the following statement: "In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks. This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans' Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence." You're a bit confused........as is the writer of the article you cited. Apparently, banning bump stocks was way more "additional regulation" than they had in mind. They opposed the legislation to ban them after issuing a statement supporting vague, unspecified, "additional regulation". That don't cut it. My statement: "They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time." still stands. fine, you can make any statements you like.......no matter how stupid they make you look. the legislation proposed doesn't mention "bump-stocks' The NRA says it should specify bump-stocks. "any device which........" is pretty vague. A target trigger assembly vs standard trigger assembly could be applied simply due to the lock-time being reduced in the target trigger. but, i'm sure common sense won't figure into your "statements'.......usually doesn't. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on Mar 6, 2018 18:26:46 GMT -5
Apparently, banning bump stocks was way more "additional regulation" than they had in mind. They opposed the legislation to ban them after issuing a statement supporting vague, unspecified, "additional regulation". That don't cut it. My statement: "They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time." still stands. fine, you can make any statements you like.......no matter how stupid they make you look. the legislation proposed doesn't mention "bump-stocks' The NRA says it should specify bump-stocks. "any device which........" is pretty vague. A target trigger assembly vs standard trigger assembly could be applied simply due to the lock-time being reduced in the target trigger. but, i'm sure common sense won't figure into your "statements'.......usually doesn't. Vague? What's vague about this sentence (highlight mine): "It shall be unlawful for any person...to manufacture, possess, or transfer any part or combination of parts that is designed and functions to increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle..." The NRA opposes that idea. Thus, "They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time.", is accurate. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by bamorin on Mar 6, 2018 18:48:34 GMT -5
fine, you can make any statements you like.......no matter how stupid they make you look. the legislation proposed doesn't mention "bump-stocks' The NRA says it should specify bump-stocks. "any device which........" is pretty vague. A target trigger assembly vs standard trigger assembly could be applied simply due to the lock-time being reduced in the target trigger. but, i'm sure common sense won't figure into your "statements'.......usually doesn't. Vague? What's vague about this sentence (highlight mine): "It shall be unlawful for any person...to manufacture, possess, or transfer any part or combination of parts that is designed and functions to increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle..." The NRA opposes that idea. Thus, "They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time.", is accurate. define "increase". how is that measured? 2 ten-thousandths of a second? where is that measured? Does decreasing lock time increase the rate of fire? |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on Mar 6, 2018 19:12:08 GMT -5
Vague? What's vague about this sentence (highlight mine): "It shall be unlawful for any person...to manufacture, possess, or transfer any part or combination of parts that is designed and functions to increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle..." The NRA opposes that idea. Thus, "They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time.", is accurate. define "increase". how is that measured? 2 ten-thousandths of a second? where is that measured? Does decreasing lock time increase the rate of fire?
verb
1. become or make greater in size, amount, intensity, or degree:I'd guess measured by the number of bullets that come out the business end per a time frame. The bill doesn't care how that is made to happen. And since the NRA opposes that idea, my statement stands. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2018 20:49:13 GMT -5
Keep doubling down Super Wally. You're almost caught up to Mikey.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2018 20:54:49 GMT -5
I'm only saying this once. This will not turn into another one of those stupid back-and-forths where you or Walt keep insisting someone said something they didn't actually say. NO ONE HERE SAID THE NRA DOESN'T HAVE AN AGENDA. YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR AGENDA IS. NO, IT IS NOT TO SELL MORE GUNS. Lol. It's their #1 agenda is to sell more guns. This is an ad on NRA own tv station Wonder what it's message is If you can watch that and with a straight face still say the NRA isn't trying to sell more guns then you're 10x more of an idiot you claim I am Noticed no comments on this |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by lz2112 on Mar 6, 2018 23:24:14 GMT -5
(FAIRFAX, VA) - The National Rifle Association today issued the following statement: "In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks. This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans' Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence." You're a bit confused........as is the writer of the article you cited. Apparently, banning bump stocks was way more "additional regulation" than they had in mind. They opposed the legislation to ban them after issuing a statement supporting vague, unspecified, "additional regulation". That don't cut it. My statement: "They advocate for gun assemblies that are the most lethal to the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time." still stands. I'm sure if Goebbels were still around, he'd hire you in a minute. Unless of course you truly believe the NRA wants mass shootings on a large scale. And if that's the case, you truly are in Willie and Mike land. |
|
|
Gator Bait!
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2018 23:33:40 GMT -5
define "increase". how is that measured? 2 ten-thousandths of a second? where is that measured? Does decreasing lock time increase the rate of fire?
verb
1. become or make greater in size, amount, intensity, or degree:I'd guess measured by the number of bullets that come out the business end per a time frame. The bill doesn't care how that is made to happen. And since the NRA opposes that idea, my statement stands.
All the gubmint has to do is reclassify bumpstocks as Class III weapons and throw that $200 transfer tax on top of the purchase price, and their sales will diminish.
Of course that will not stop ANY firearm from being stolen and used for dastardly deeds. |
|
