Trump back in step with NRA after doubts over Parkland shooting

[UncleTouchyFingers]

2 minutes ago, PhonThong said:

I would have made that security guy hit me. That was a public place. Then I would have sued her for all she is worth.

 

Its enough to make anyone angry, and really is the crux of the matter. Wealthy limousine liberals and Democrat Politicians believe they are more important than mere plebs and should be protected with the same guns they are advocating to remove and control for others. 

 

Bernie Sanders was marching a few weeks ago for gun control with a literal platoon of armed guards around him, and surely had men covering him with actual "assault weapons" from a distance. 

 

This is why the NRA is what it is and why its needed so badly. Everyone, not just rich people and people of privilege, should be able to protect themselves. 

 

All men are created equal. 

[rudi49jr]

55 minutes ago, PhonThong said:

the educated.

Please excuse me while I go find a bucket to throw up in.

[rudi49jr]

27 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

The NRA has never made the argument that guns make everything safer. 

 

Jeez dude, really? Gun sales are the only thing the NRA is interested in, the more the better. "Guns don't kill people, people kill people". Remember that?

[UncleTouchyFingers]

21 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

Jeez dude, really? Gun sales are the only thing the NRA is interested in, the more the better. "Guns don't kill people, people kill people". Remember that?

 

False. Your narrative that the NRA only cares about gun sales is 100% false. The People overwhelmingly fund the NRA. Don't forget that the NRA is the oldest civil rights organization in the United States, founded in 1871. Thats alot of history for liberals & democrats to try and re-write. 

 

Quote

The organization's overall revenue, which includes membership dues, program fees and other contributions, has boomed in recent years – rising to nearly $350 million in 2013. The majority of this money funds NRA initiatives like member newsletters, sporting events and gun safety education and training programs.

 

These help the NRA recruit new members and spread its pro-gun message. But to influence laws and keep its chosen leaders in power, it has a separate pool of money to use.

 

A CNNMoney analysis of federal campaign finance records shows that much of this money comes from everyday Americans. And these contributions, which the NRA uses to keep pro-gun lawmakers in office, are on the rise.

 

Some political funding comes from big corporations, many within the gun industry, which donate millions to the NRA. But companies are barred from donating to the NRA’s political action committee, which the agency uses to fill campaign coffers, run ads and send out mailers for and against candidates.

 

That’s where individual donations come in.

 

http://money.cnn.com/news/cnnmoney-investigates/nra-funding-donors/index.html

[cnxgary]

Prior to the speech given by Trump on Fri. to the N.R.A some members that have permits to carry concealed weapons were denied entry due to security concerns. Hypocritical is it not especially when Trump and all gun nuts call for all citizens to arm themselves. The more guns the safer the world eh but not around VIP"s? If these people call for arming teachers why not for bank employees, bus drivers, cab drivers and on and on......

[Mavrick6165]

On 5/4/2018 at 10:30 PM, Expatthailover said:

Shouldnt surprise anyone that this president values guns and dollars over the safety of his nation's children and citizenry.

Ironic given his well documented efforts to successfully dodge conscription.

A coward who wont use a firearm in the defence of his nation.

Commander in chief of the armed forces ....a draft dodger. 

 

get facts straight ... only 238 people die from  rifles in 2016 while drunk driver kill 68, 000 or the18 kids die every minute from driving and Texting .... i  dont hear them call a ban on phone or cars or beer ,... i we see how well a baned work,,, seeing texting and driving is baned 

 

 

[lannarebirth]

36 minutes ago, Mavrick6165 said:

get facts straight ... only 238 people die from  rifles in 2016 while drunk driver kill 68, 000 or the18 kids die every minute from driving and Texting .... i  dont hear them call a ban on phone or cars or beer ,... i we see how well a baned work,,, seeing texting and driving is baned 

 

 

9 people die and over 1,000 injured in texting and driving accidents per day. Still, way too many.

[farcanell]

6 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

But they aren't "assault weapons". They are not select fire, they are not full auto, and those are the criteria for being a military weapon. 

 

And your argument that they should be banned not because of statistics but because of the name that gun-ban politicians gave the weapons themselves isn't a very good one. 

 

5 hours ago, PhonThong said:

Actually, to be correct, I hardly think many if any actual assault weapons were used. Assault weapons are fully automatic weapons.

Are you guys actually reading the thread?

 

my response mentioning assault weapons was in direct result to another poster asking “why are they going after assault weapons? “

 

So... you need to bring this up in opposition to the gun nut who first floated this concept, if you disagree with him

[farcanell]

2 hours ago, Mavrick6165 said:

get facts straight ... only 238 people die from  rifles in 2016 while drunk driver kill 68, 000 or the18 kids die every minute from driving and Texting .... i  dont hear them call a ban on phone or cars or beer ,... i we see how well a baned work,,, seeing texting and driving is baned 

 

 

??? car phone use as an argument... wonderful... yes it’s always smart to highlight how breaking one law mitigates or normalizes breaking another.

 

cars? Well... without looking at stats, I wonder what the percentage of deaths are, that are a side effect of a crime, like speeding, drunk driving, negligence etc, which would be  “banned” activities, or illegal activities

 

?? alcohol? You went there? Wow! But OK. Now we get to talk about the 18th amendment.... banning alcohol.... it was banned, but folk didn’t like that, probably because of the pain and suffering caused by the crime that sprung up around the ban, so the 18 amendment was repealed.

 

now.... if the pain and suffering caused by crime, enabled the 18th amendment to be repealed, then ipso facto, it can enable the 2nd amendment to be repealed

 

any argument claiming unalterable constitutional rights as a reason to keep guns, is dipped in cow manure

 

so....this highlights that you (nationally) willingly and flagrantly ignore and flaunt bans and laws.... perhaps explaining why the US has the highest incarceration level in the world!

 

perhaps a different approach is needed.... say a proactive approach, (like restricting deadly weapon availability.) vs a reactive approach.... or as in this OP, a no action approach, other than BS thoughts and prayers that will be forthcoming after the next school shooting (we’ve seen how we’ll thoughts and prayers work, right?)

 

[underlordcthulhu]

[underlordcthulhu]

10 minutes ago, farcanell said:

 BS thoughts and prayers that will be forthcoming after the next school shooting (we’ve seen how we’ll thoughts and prayers work, right?)

 

Thoughts and prayers? Not so much. A good guy with a gun can do wonders though. Like, say Stephen Willeford, who stopped the shooter in Sutherland Springs. Didn't hear much about him on the MSM did we? Hmmm wonder why, couldn't be because it went against their flimsy anti-gun arguments/agenda could it? Nah, theyre upright honest people who really care about the truth 555

[farcanell]

4 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

False. Your narrative that the NRA only cares about gun sales is 100% false. The People overwhelmingly fund the NRA. Don't forget that the NRA is the oldest civil rights organization in the United States, founded in 1871. Thats alot of history for liberals & democrats to try and re-write. 

 

 

http://money.cnn.com/news/cnnmoney-investigates/nra-funding-donors/index.html

LMAO...... before calling other people’s assertions false, perhaps you might check your own assertions, vs believeing unquestionably in what the most influential lobbyist group in the world tells you to be true..... sheepeople

 

and..... what does the length of an organizations history have to do with anything? No one is suggesting changing the past, or history (new wave Hollywood might have you believe time travel is possible... but... ).... the hope is for a change of the future.

Edited May 6, 2018 by farcanell

[heybruce]

22 hours ago, MajarTheLion said:

OK, I'll bite. If gun control advocates care about our children so much, why are they going after *assault weapons*, one of the smallest means of homicide in the US? Let's start there. However, I reserve the right to bring up car accidents for further disputing of your reality you appear to live in.

Assault weapons are low-hanging fruit, most gun owners understand that they are useless for anything other than killing people, and the are too lethal for home defense in a residential area. 

 

Assault weapons are not used in a large number of murders because they represent only a small fraction of the guns owned in the US, it is the paranoids seeking a false sense of empowerment who own assault weapons. That is why they have been used in so many mass shootings.

[heybruce]

7 hours ago, RobFord said:

This about sums it up.

 

 

But, but, but...only a small minority of total gun deaths!

 

And they're not useless, they make you feel like Rambo when you hold them!  That's useful, right?

[heybruce]

16 hours ago, Basil B said:

You just do not get it, the gang violence in the UK is an American export, kids trying to to copy their American cousins, and we are doing something about it.

 

You can carry a pocket knife if you can show good cause.

 

But in the UK we have been doing something about reducing violence...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knife_legislation

From the reference in your post:

 

(3) This section applies to a folding pocketknife if the cutting edge of its blade exceeds 3 inches.

 

So people can carry their handy Swiss Army knife (I rarely leave home without it) unless its one of silly ones with a ridiculous large blade. 

 

I'm sure that farmers, foresters, sailors, etc. who may have the need for a larger blade have no problem carrying such a knife on the job, and the police have no problem distinguishing between a knife that is carried as a convenient tool (my Swiss Army knife has a bottle opener, which often comes in handy) and one that serves no obvious purpose other than as a weapon.

[heybruce]

8 hours ago, 7by7 said:

I haven't checked, but it is highly probable that more Americans were killed in road traffic accidents last year than by guns. 

 

But there is a difference; motor vehicles can, and do, kill. Due to the driver's incompetence, poor maintenance or a deliberate act by the driver. But that is not what motor vehicles are designed for. They are designed as a means of transport.

 

Whereas guns are designed for one purpose and one purpose only; to kill.

Yes, vehicles do kill more people than guns in the US.  They are dangerous, which is why vehicles are registered and drivers must demonstrate they can competently, safely operate a vehicle and obtain a license to do so. 

 

I'm a gun owner, I would have no problem registering my weapons and going through training and licensing.  I've already had military small arms training, in which the emphasis was on safety, including safe maintenance and storage of the weapon. 

 

It is idiotic that any fool who has managed to avoid a criminal record or documented mental issue can obtain a gun in the US without demonstrating any competence.

[PhonThong]

6 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

Its enough to make anyone angry, and really is the crux of the matter. Wealthy limousine liberals and Democrat Politicians believe they are more important than mere plebs and should be protected with the same guns they are advocating to remove and control for others. 

 

Bernie Sanders was marching a few weeks ago for gun control with a literal platoon of armed guards around him, and surely had men covering him with actual "assault weapons" from a distance. 

 

This is why the NRA is what it is and why its needed so badly. Everyone, not just rich people and people of privilege, should be able to protect themselves. 

 

All men are created equal. 

I have been an NRA member for longer than I can remember.

[farcanell]

26 minutes ago, underlordcthulhu said:

Thoughts and prayers? Not so much. A good guy with a gun can do wonders though. Like, say Stephen Willeford, who stopped the shooter in Sutherland Springs. Didn't hear much about him on the MSM did we? Hmmm wonder why, couldn't be because it went against their flimsy anti-gun arguments/agenda could it? Nah, theyre upright honest people who really care about the truth 555

What are you talking about? Everybody in the worldheard about Willeford..... thanks to the most influential lobby machine in the world.... the one promoting gun ownership... you know the one.

 

and yes... a good guy with a gun.... but what wonders did he do?. he chased down an armed offender who had already killed 26 people, so ... no real wonder achieved.... 

 

however, by touting him as a hero (which he might be.) the NRA is actively endorsing and encouraging vigilantism.... a really responsible approach, when everyone else is trying to reduce this form of uncontrolled  “justice.”

 

”here lies George johnstow hanged 1882. He was right.  We was wrong... now he’s gone” tombstone cemetery.... have y’all not yet learned anything?

[PhonThong]

5 hours ago, rudi49jr said:

Please excuse me while I go find a bucket to throw up in.

Who are you to change someone's post?

[farcanell]

15 minutes ago, heybruce said:

 

I'm a gun owner, I would have no problem registering my weapons and going through training and licensing.  I've already had military small arms training, in which the emphasis was on safety, including safe maintenance and storage of the weapon. 

 

It is idiotic that any fool who has managed to avoid a criminal record or documented mental issue can obtain a gun in the US without demonstrating any competence.

Here it is... here’s how it’s done.... simple. Clean. Law abiding

 

and I thought it was supposed to be hard. ?

[underlordcthulhu]

1 minute ago, farcanell said:

What are you talking about? Everybody in the worldheard about Willeford..... thanks to the most influential lobby machine in the world.... the one promoting gun ownership... you know the one.

 

and yes... a good guy with a gun.... but what wonders did he do?. he chased down an armed offender who had already killed 26 people, so ... no real wonder achieved.... 

 

however, by touting him as a hero (which he might be.) the NRA is actively endorsing and encouraging vigilantism.... a really responsible approach, when everyone else is trying to reduce this form of uncontrolled  “justice.”

 

”here lies George johnstow hanged 1882. He was right.  We was wrong... now he’s gone” tombstone cemetery.... have y’all not yet learned anything?

Is the NRA now considered a MSM outfit? That's news to me!

So had he killed another 26 people that's no big deal right?

'Uncontrolled justice' aka defending yourself and community from killers. Gotcha. 

[7by7]

7 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

I guess at the end of the day you guys are totally fine with your government not trusting you with sharp objects without acceptable reason. Im not ok with this and neither are millions and millions of Americans, which is why the UK is being used in the Gun Control debate. The USA has over 300 million guns in circulation, yet somehow London has surpassed New Yorks murder rate.  

 

Have you heard of the boiling frog metaphor? Reminds me of you guys. 

Maybe you are totally fine with the regular killing of innocent people so you can continue to play with your phallic symbol; but we brits are not and are prepared to have our freedom to carry a weopon, of any kind, restricted in order to protect the innocent.

 

Of course, such laws do not prevent all violent crime; as you rightly point out so far this year the murder rate in London does surpass that of new York. But for how much longer, I wonder. 

 

This is the latest comparison I can find after a, admittedly, brief search. Seems it is you who has failed to realise he is sitting in boiling water!

[7by7]

7 hours ago, underlordcthulhu said:

How many NRA members have shot up a school, concert, church etc? Please do fill us in. 

 How many of those who have committed such mass shootings in the USA, of which up to 22nd April there had been 67 so far in 2018 (source), would have been able to obtain the weapon(s) to do so were it not for the lax gun laws so beloved of the NRA and the politicians they have in their pocket?

 

67 mass shootings in less than 4 months; more since then (see here)!

 

346 mass shootings in 2017; that's nearly one a day!

 

What is your president's solution?

 

Make more guns more easily available to more people! 

 

And you and people like you agree with him; madness!

[farcanell]

7 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

I guess at the end of the day you guys are totally fine with your government not trusting you with sharp objects without acceptable reason. Im not ok with this and neither are millions and millions of Americans, which is why the UK is being used in the Gun Control debate. The USA has over 300 million guns in circulation, yet somehow London has surpassed New Yorks murder rate.  

 

Have you heard of the boiling frog metaphor? Reminds me of you guys. 

Yep... the mind boggling brigade is out in force today.

 

the boiling frog hey? Like the insidious rise of influence of what started as a marksmanship association, to effectively control the mouth flapping of the worlds (supposed) most powerful man.... yep... heard about the boiling frog.

 

but that’s a cool argument.... go with that... but let’s look at the first paragraph shall we?

 

being trusted with weapons.... like y’all are trusted with guns.... (because who needs a hand to hand weapon when you can kill from a cowardly distance)... that seems to have worked well, but it’s only an opinion, so let’s look at your version of facts

 

london has surpassed New York’s murder rates.... ok... yes... but for what? One single month in recent history, was it?

 

2017... New York... 3.4 per 100,000

2017... london... 1.2 per 100,000

 

so... fact checking uncovers deliberately misleading information, put out there (undoubtedly by the NRA.... can’t be bothered fact checking that ?) to deceive those wanting to be deceived, to bolster their unsupportable argument with obfuscating deflection

[7by7]

6 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

<snip>

The NRA has never made the argument that guns make everything safer. 

But Trump in his speech to them did

Quote

In a speech to the National Rifle Association (NRA) on Friday, Trump mimicked the shooting of victims in the Paris rampage, and said if civilians had been armed “it would have been a whole different story.” (source)

 How many NRA members have disassociated themselves from that comment?

 

What have the key figures in the NRA (Pete Brownell, President Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President, Chris W. Cox, chief lobbyist and Dana Loesch, national spokesperson) had to say about this remark by Trump?

[underlordcthulhu]

19 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 How many of those who have committed such mass shootings in the USA, of which up to 22nd April there had been 67 so far in 2018 (source), would have been able to obtain the weapon(s) to do so were it not for the lax gun laws so beloved of the NRA and the politicians they have in their pocket?

 

67 mass shootings in less than 4 months; more since then (see here)!

 

346 mass shootings in 2017; that's nearly one a day!

 

What is your president's solution?

 

Make more guns more easily available to more people! 

 

And you and people like you agree with him; madness!

Nice try avoiding the question. Our inalienable gun rights don't come from the NRA. We were always meant to have the right to own firearms. So don't give me this 'if it weren't for the NRA' nonsense.

Tell me how many evil scary big bad NRA members have committed mass shootings?

Edited May 6, 2018 by underlordcthulhu

[farcanell]

35 minutes ago, underlordcthulhu said:

Is the NRA now considered a MSM outfit? That's news to me!

So had he killed another 26 people that's no big deal right?

'Uncontrolled justice' aka defending yourself and community from killers. Gotcha. 

Really?

 

the NRA screams it’s message, and the main stream media dutifully repeats it.... ergo... everybody heard about willeford, via the msm, with the NRA whipping up a pro NRA frenzy over the issue

 

that I just needed to attempt to explain this, damages any arguments you might make

 

that you believe normal law enforcement would not have caught the fleeing offender, is an issue with US law enforcement

 

that you ascribe to vigilantism, which has no legal authority, and is most definitely not a hallmark of a civilized society, is a worry, especially to your nation’s children, apparently

 

and most telling.... supporting actions which have no legal standing, whilst insisting on your legal right to own guns... hypocritical at best 

 

[underlordcthulhu]

2 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Really?

 

the NRA screams it’s message, and the main stream media dutifully repeats it.... ergo... everybody heard about willeford, via the msm, with the NRA whipping up a pro NRA frenzy over the issue

 

that I just needed to attempt to explain this, damages any arguments you might make

 

that you believe normal law enforcement would not have caught the fleeing offender, is an issue with US law enforcement

 

that you ascribe to vigilantism, which has no legal authority, and is most definitely not a hallmark of a civilized society, is a worry, especially to your nation’s children, apparently

 

and most telling.... supporting actions which have no legal standing, whilst insisting on your legal right to own guns... hypocritical at best 

 

I need to sleep now. Most of what you posted is just silly.

I'll address your bit about children though. It's hard to imagine something more evil than leaving the protection of vulnerable children up to the state and trying to strip those rights from parents and community. 

Not happening on my watch.

[7by7]

22 minutes ago, underlordcthulhu said:

Nice try avoiding the question. Our inalienable gun rights don't come from the NRA. We were always meant to have the right to own firearms. So don't give me this 'if it weren't for the NRA' nonsense.

 No, your gun rights come from colonial days and are based upon the English Bill of Rights 1689, when they only applied to white Protestants, and were incorporated into your constitution via the second amendment after your revolution.

 

We in the UK long ago realised that the world has moved on since the 17th century and the need for a 'well regulated militia' has passed due to the introduction of a professional police force and other law enforcement agencies; which I believe you also have in the USA. 

 

The US supreme court has ruled that your 2nd amendment rights are not unlimited and the 2nd amendment does not prohibit regulation of gun ownership. There is absolutely no constitutional reason why the USA cannot follow the example of the civilised world and bring in stricter gun control laws. It just needs a government with the political will.

 

22 minutes ago, underlordcthulhu said:

Tell me how many evil scary big bad NRA members have committed mass shootings?

I don't know; do you? But I doubt that any of thos who did commit such atrocities were members of a 'well regulated militia' which is the actual, real purpose of your 2nd amendment!

 

I also doubt that many NRA members are also members of a 'well regulated militia!' Perhaps you van tell us whether or not that is the case.

 

But what I actually asked, and you have attempted to deflect from, was 

41 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

How many of those who have committed such mass shootings in the USA, of which up to 22nd April there had been 67 so far in 2018 (source), would have been able to obtain the weapon(s) to do so were it not for the lax gun laws so beloved of the NRA and the politicians they have in their pocket?

Will you answer, or will you try and deflect again?

Edited May 6, 2018 by 7by7
Typo

[Slip]

7 minutes ago, underlordcthulhu said:

I need to sleep now. Most of what you posted is just silly.

I'll address your bit about children though. It's hard to imagine something more evil than leaving the protection of vulnerable children up to the state and trying to strip those rights from parents and community. 

Not happening on my watch.

Tell that to all the school shooting victims.