| Author | Post |
|---|
rodbender
Founder's Club Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | Elgin, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 763 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 01:11 am |
|
| I'm concerned about how the NRA compromises so easily. As with HB1399 and the way they worked with Clinton on the AWB. Also about their silence on the OC movement, which I feel is absolutely deplorable. Until they do something of real substance that shows they will not compromise so easily and/or show some genuine support for the OC movement, I can not in good conscience consider rejoining the NRA, at any price. They will not even respond to my emails on the OC subject. That is inexcusable. Not even an email, nothing.
|
rodbender
Founder's Club Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | Elgin, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 763 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 01:16 am |
|
Somehow I don't think Tacomatose got the replies he was looking for.
|
HankT
State Researcher
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 01:26 am |
|
Thundar wrote: HankT wrote: Thundar wrote:
No JPFO spends a lot of energy trying to point out the two faced tactic of the NRA.
GOA is focused upon gun rights. Often gets results in court.
You see the NRA is an ends justify the means organisation. Too bad they are not principled and forthright.
If you care about results, then consider this.
There are between 220 and 270 million guns in the United States. Far more than any country on earth. Even after decades of strong political pushes for severe regulation by the populus.
Those millions of guns didn't get here because of the GOA.
You are right Hank, they got here because we are a free people. Those guns got here in spite of the NRA.
How many guns would be here if there were no NRA, d'ya think?
|
Doug Huffman
State Researcher
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 10:50 am |
|
HankT wrote: Thundar wrote: Those guns got here in spite of the NRA.
How many guns would be here if there were no NRA, d'ya think?
As many as if all Fords had three wheels.
|
ne1
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 402 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 05:43 pm |
|
Every running Ford that I know of has three wheels.
Doug Huffman wrote:
HankT wrote: Thundar wrote: Those guns got here in spite of the NRA.
How many guns would be here if there were no NRA, d'ya think?
As many as if all Fords had three wheels.
|
Thundar
Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 06:14 pm |
|
Doug Huffman wrote: HankT wrote: Thundar wrote: Those guns got here in spite of the NRA.
How many guns would be here if there were no NRA, d'ya think?
As many as if all Fords had three wheels.
Both of my Ford Pick Up trucks have 3 wheels, in fact they both run on 4 and have a spare!!! They got here because of hard working Americans.
Remember Heller got here in spite of the NRA, not because of the NRA.
Last edited on Fri Oct 10th, 2008 06:17 pm by Thundar
|
Thundar
Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 06:30 pm |
|
| Hey just how discounted are those memberships? I have an old 1 peso note from Mexico that is worth a lot less than 2 cents. You might convince me to join if the peso will suffice.
|
Doug Huffman
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11th, 2008 09:43 am |
|
Thundar wrote: Hey just how discounted are those memberships?
Memberships are now free to a large class of people. Gotta make the claim of 400,000 credible!
|
mark edward marchiafava
Member
|
Posted: Sun Oct 12th, 2008 12:23 am |
|
Regardless of the price, or even if the NRA (negotiate rights away) is GIVING memberships away, count me out. I am more selective than most about who/what I associate with.
|
HankT
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sun Oct 12th, 2008 01:46 am |
|
Doug Huffman wrote: Memberships are now free to a large class of people. Gotta make the claim of 400,000 credible!
Huffy, I thought it was actually 40,000?
|
Doug Huffman
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sun Oct 12th, 2008 06:33 pm |
|
That's two.
|
I the Person
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 15th, 2008 04:53 pm |
|
I'm a Life Member of the NRA and GOA. I'm also an NRA-certified Firearms Instructor and Range Safety Officer. I was also a delegate to the 2008 Texas Republican Convention. Just to give y'all some idea of where I'm coming from.
I wish the NRA wish stay out of politics and stick to shooting matches and gun safety courses, and leave the lobbying to GOA. Why? Because the GOA takes a no-compromise approach to the 2d Amendment. I don't want the NRA compromising my rights away. I really wish the NRA would grow a pair and stop compromising and start demanding immediate and complete repeal of all gun laws. They could do it.
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. (George Bernard Shaw)
Here's one of the things that bothers me about the NRA: Board Member Joaquin Jackson tells a reporter that citizens should be restricted to five rounds, and 'assault weapons' should be restricted to the police and military, and he is allowed to remain on the Board of Directors, even after the NRA was given a petition from members expressing that this was unacceptable, and demanding his removal:
http://recalljoaquinjackson.blogspot.com/
Joaquin Jackson, the enemy within:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSGySNLyACE
"Well, I'm a person that believes in a weapon should never…I personally believe a weapon should never have over a – far as civilian – 5 round capacity. If a hunter, if you're a hunter if you're gonna go hunting with a weapon, you shouldn't need over but one round…" and
"Well we've talked, we've discussed it you know, but uh this thing about assault weapons has been a kind of a touchy deal, but personally, I think these assault weapons basically need to be in the hands of the military and they need to be in the hands of the police, but uh, as far as assault weapons to a civilian, if you… if you… it's alright if you got that magazine capacity down to five…" Joaquin Jackson seems to believe that the 2d Amendment has something to do with hunting, and that the police and military are the Only Ones in the room professional enough to handle those weapons. I'd appreciate it if he resigned and never spoke to another reporter. He certainly doesn't represent me.
Where rights (liberty) secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no legislation which would abrogate (abolish) them." - U.S. Supreme Court, Miranda vs Arizona
Last edited on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 04:58 pm by
|
I the Person
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 15th, 2008 05:08 pm |
|
mark edward marchiafava wrote: Slayer of Paper and others: it's not our duty to vote for someone who has the best chance of winning or is the lesser of many evils. No, ours is to ALWAYS do that which is right, consequences be damned.
+1000. Integrity matters to me. I find McCain and Obama both sorely lacking in that regard.
Every one of the candidates for this year's presidential election have sworn an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. I only know of one who has been keeping his oath faithfully for over twenty years. Guess who that is?
http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2007/11/30/ron-paul-and-the-nra/
Read what Kahrman the Magnificent wrote, it's excellent. And you'll start to get an idea of why I do not recommend the NRA.
Last edited on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 05:09 pm by
|
GnGKlinger
Member
| Joined: | Sun Jul 13th, 2008 |
| Location: | Idaho Falls |
| Posts: | 46 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 18th, 2008 06:10 am |
|
I get the Easy way out this year: I can vote for Baldwin (sticking to MY beliefs) and Idaho will still go for Mcpain.
Im holdin out for 2012, and hopefully its Paul, Palin, Baldwin, or Barr. Even it they were (God forbid) running on the Democratic platform.....Id still vote for them.
|
DonTreadOnMe
Member
|
Posted: Sat Oct 18th, 2008 02:56 pm |
|
GnGKlinger wrote: I get the Easy way out this year: I can vote for Baldwin (sticking to MY beliefs) and Idaho will still go for Mcpain.
Im holdin out for 2012, and hopefully its Paul, Palin, Baldwin, or Barr. Even it they were (God forbid) running on the Democratic platform.....Id still vote for them.
Voting for McCain this time around....has a fair degree of chance of having Palin finish the term or follow him. Why not vote for the ticket to increase the chance of her becoming the next president?
I like McCain(over all, not on immigration), but I really would love to see Palin in the oval office.
Ron, Barr or Baldwin will never be the white house....other than as a guest maybe.
|
Doug Huffman
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sat Oct 18th, 2008 03:03 pm |
|
DonTreadOnMe wrote:Ron, Barr or Baldwin will never be the white house....other than as a guest maybe.
Neither will VP Palin. The VP only Constitutional duties are to succeed POTUS and preside over the Senate.
|
DonTreadOnMe
Member
|
Posted: Sat Oct 18th, 2008 04:00 pm |
|
Doug Huffman wrote: DonTreadOnMe wrote:Ron, Barr or Baldwin will never be the white house....other than as a guest maybe.
Neither will VP Palin. The VP only Constitutional duties are to succeed POTUS and preside over the Senate.
That is exactly was I was alluding.
Palin could indeed end up succeeding McCain if he wins and something happens to him, such as a heath issue. That is a very realistic possibility. ...or if McCain where to finish his first term, I dont think he would run for the second. That would put Palin in a good spot to make a run. The others you mentioned....they will never be in the white house.
The only one of the four you mentioned to have any shot is Palin, and that is much much more viable with a McCain win. Why not work to give her the best shot at the presidency you can?
|
DonTreadOnMe
Member
|
Posted: Sat Oct 18th, 2008 04:04 pm |
|
DonTreadOnMe wrote: Doug Huffman wrote: DonTreadOnMe wrote:Ron, Barr or Baldwin will never be the white house....other than as a guest maybe.
Neither will VP Palin. The VP only Constitutional duties are to succeed POTUS and preside over the Senate.
That is exactly was I was alluding.
Palin could indeed end up succeeding McCain if he wins and something happens to him, such as a heath issue. That is a very realistic possibility. ...or if McCain where to finish his first term, I dont think he would run for the second. That would put Palin in a good spot to make a run. The others you mentioned....they will never be in the white house.
The only one of the four you mentioned to have any shot is Palin, and that is much much more viable with a McCain win. Why not work to give her the best shot at the presidency you can?
Above question of why not support Palin is for GnGKlinger...not for Huffman.
GnGKlinger, so why not support a ticket that could end up putting Palin in the white house if you support her??
I know I would love to see her win.
|
rodbender
Founder's Club Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | Elgin, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 763 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 18th, 2008 04:42 pm |
|
Something to ponder. There supposedly was a curse put on "the great white father in Wasington" by a Shawnee Indian Chief, or possibly his half brother. The curse said that each one elected in a year ending with 0 would die in office. Except for Zachery Taylor, all Presidents that have died in office follow this pattern. This curse was broken by Ronald Reagan, elected in 1980. George W. will be the next (should he make it to Jan. 20). It has been 45 years since a president has died in office. I have no ill will toward anyone, even Barrack Obama, but, I've got a very strange feeling that we are way overdue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Presidents_who_died_in_office
# in
office
President
Year(s) Elected
Length of term (days)
Date of Death
Cause of Death
Age at Death
9
William Henry Harrison
1840
31
April 4, 1841
Pneumonia and Pleurisy
68
12
Zachary Taylor
1848
491
July 9, 1850
Bad cherries and milk.
65
16
Abraham Lincoln
1860, 1864
1,503
April 15, 1865
Assassinated by John Wilkes Booth
56
20
James A. Garfield
1880
199
September 19, 1881
Assassinated by Charles Julius Guiteau
49
25
William McKinley
1896, 1900
1,654
September 14, 1901
Assassinated by Leon Frank Czolgosz
58
29
Warren G. Harding
1920
881
August 2, 1923
Heart attack. Some speculation of murder.[citation needed]
57
32
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
1932, 1936, 1940, 1944
4,422
April 12, 1945
Cerebral hemorrhage
63
35
John Fitzgerald Kennedy
1960
1,036
November 22, 1963
According to the Warren Commission Report, assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone; other theories persist, see Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories
46
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Tippecanoe
[edit] The curse
The curse, first widely noted in a Ripley's Believe It or Not book published in 1931 [1], began with the death of William Henry Harrison, who died in 1841 after having been elected in 1840. For the next 120 years, presidents elected during years ending in a zero ultimately died while serving in office, from William Henry Harrison, (elected 1840, died 1841) to John F. Kennedy (elected 1960, died 1963). Zachary Taylor's death of acute gastroenteritis does not fit this pattern. Although he died in 1850, just 16 months after election, the election itself took place in 1848, excluding him from the "curse".
edit] Origins
The name "Curse of Tippecanoe" derives from the 1811 battle. As governor of the Indiana Territory, William Harrison bribed Native Americans to cede their lands to the U.S. government and handed out whiskey that caused alcoholism to run rampant among Indians. [2] These hostile acts angered the Shawnee chief Tecumseh ("Panther in the sky") and brought government soldiers and Native Americans to the brink of war. As a result, Tecumseh and his brother organized a defensive group of Indian tribes designed to resist white westward expansion. In 1811, Harrison successfully attacked Tecumseh’s village in which Harrison defeated the Shawnee leaders Tecumseh and his brother Tenskwatawa, known as the Prophet along the Tippecanoe River earning Harrison fame and the nickname "Old Tippecanoe". [2] Harrison strengthened his reputation even more by defeating the British at the Battle of the Thames during the War of 1812.[2] Supposedly, the Prophet set a curse against Harrison and future White House occupants.[3]
|
AbNo
Member
|
Posted: Mon Oct 20th, 2008 03:03 am |
|
Hmm, as soon as I see the NRA being proactive, I'll consider it.
For now, they have no place in my home.
|
Current time is 08:14 pm | Page:   1 2 3   |
|
