How much longer are we going to allow our country to be held hostage at gunpoint by the NRA? Nothing will be done as long as politicians receive money from the NRA to do as they are told. Stop the madness.

Things might change if a child, wife or family member of a famous politician would be gunned down ....then just maybe, something might get done.

Image for post How much longer are we going to allow our country to be held hostage at gunpoint by the NRA?  Nothing will be done as long as politicians receive money from the NRA to do as they are told.   Stop the madness.
StarzAboves avatar Life
Share
8 30

How do countries where everyone isn't automatically allowed to own a weapon manage?Just asking.Britain for instance.

@Azlotto https://nra.org.uk/

Yeah I think what Blew means is we need licences over here and it's very hard to obtain a firearm. I mean no one I know and probably no one Blew knows as even held a gun never mind owning or firing one. 乂º◡^乂

@Ada Yeah I think what Blew means is we need licences over here and it's very hard to obtain a firearm. I mean no one I...

Why not, Ada. Guns are fun to shoot. I own several firearms. I hope you don't hate me for that.

@Azlotto Why not, Ada. Guns are fun to shoot. I own several firearms. I hope you don't hate me for that.

No, I mean I understand it's a totally different situation over in America to over here in Britain AZ.
乂º◡º乂

This user has been banned.
@2733235

Indeed, JD...I have never shot up a can that didn't deserve it. smile smilie

I'm a member...and have been most of my adult life. My Dad gave me my first gun when I was 10 years old (a 20 gauge shotgun).

This user has deactivated their account.
This comment was deleted by its author.
@2729959

Nope ... it's the criminals and mentally ill and druggies who are the problem.

I listen to the scanner nearly every night. And every night there are 2 stores that get "hit" with attempted robbery. Usually the same stores.

(One of those stores is right next door to a police substation. I mean, the substation is literally sharing a wall with the store.)

Even in the "good" section of town, there have been random attacks on people by someone with a knife or machete ... or just threatening by "panhandlers", who get upset that you don't give them money.

I need a gun to protect myself from the criminals and crazies.
Not to mention the dogs that people let run wild, who want to attack pedestrians walking on the public sidewalk.

@2729383

No one is wanting to take hand guns, or hunting rifles away from anyone. It's the assault rifles that need to go. But it is the NRA that wants to keep them, only for monetary reasons, they don't care about you, your husband or the many kids whose lives would have been spared had he not had an assault weapon....a weapon that is made to kill lots of people.

The NRA is the problem. They spend millions of dollars to politicians so they can have their way......Congress needs to step up to the plate and do what they were elected to do....work for the American people.

Thanks for your comments, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Enjoy your day.

The premise of this poll is false because the NRA is not holding anybody hostage by gunpoint, so to ask how much longer so we have to allow it is a bogus and irrelevant question! The NRA's contribution to politicians is miniscule compared to the contributions made to them by anti-2nd Amendment groups or by the groups like Planned Parenthood who are responsible for literally millions of murders without the same outrage being expressed as the gun grabbers are doing right now!pce smilie

@goblue1968 The premise of this poll is false because the NRA is not holding anybody hostage by gunpoint, so to ask how much...

Yes they are. They pay millions of dollars to politicians so they will do what the NRA wants. That's hostage.

The more guns they can sell, the better they like it. They don't care who gets shot with their weapons....they just want to make money.

@StarzAbove Yes they are. They pay millions of dollars to politicians so they will do what the NRA wants. That's hostage...

Starz, You deliberately ignored my attempt to correct your blatantly bogus premise that the NRA is holding anybody hostage by gunpoint. I will make the presumption that you are not ignorant and that you know what the definitions of the words "hostage" and "at gunpoint" are. Perhaps your poll question would be better worded if you substituted the words "under the influence of" for "hostage", because I'm sure that you are well aware that the politicians to whom you refer are fully free to move about as they wish and are not physically restricted in their movements as they would if they were actually hostages. Furthermore, I am reasonably confident that no loaded guns are being pointed at any of them to dissuade any of them from moving about as they wish.

And I am actually more surprised that you are not as outraged about the $77 million that have been spent by Planned Parenthood and Emily's List recently to encourage politicians to continue to support the murder of 3000 babies per day in the U.S. That amount of money dwarfs the piddling amount that the NRA has spent during that time.

@goblue1968 Starz, You deliberately ignored my attempt to correct your blatantly bogus premise that the NRA is holding anybody...

I didn't ignore your comments about my imperfect post, only because it is not imperfect nor bogus, and I certainly don't need any corrections from you.

The NRA is holding our politicians and president hostage, not with guns, but with greed and money! Just today Trump gave into them again, all because they will not give him money for his campaign unless he does what they want. When talking to the students from Parkland, FL, he basically told them and others at a meeting that he would bump up the age limit in buying guns to 21 instead of 18.

Then he has a meeting with the NRA and he folds again, and does exactly what the NRA wants. That is hostage in my books, and yours too if you would admit it. The NRA is out to see guns and make money, they don't care who gets shot as long as they make money. Too bad some people are blind to that fact.

And no, I'm not ignorant, and there was no reason for you to even bring my intelligence into this conversation. I don't have to diss anyone to get my point across.

And if you don't think my post is correct, maybe you should make one of your own. I may be wrong but I don't ever remember seeing any of your posts. But like others, you sit back, not make any posts, and then give disparaging comments about those of us who do.

As far as Planned Parenthood is concerned, if you are so concerned about that organization, make a post about it. I'm sure the NRA has spent much much more lobbying the politicians, in fact they gave $30 million to the Trump campaign alone.

Enjoy your day!!!!!

@StarzAbove I didn't ignore your comments about my imperfect post, only because it is not imperfect nor bogus, and I certainly...

I'm glad you verified my presumption that you are not ignorant, but I still insist that your use of the word "hostage" is in fact bogus, as I explained to you in my previous post. I suggested a more accurate phrase to use in place of the inaccurate "hostage" but you keep insisting on repeating that fake news.

As far as your skepticism about the relative lobbying money spent by Planned Parenthood versus the NRA, I researched my data that I reported about the baby murdering Planned Parenthood and the NRA spending so I know my $77 million quote is correct.

Finally, none of the mass shootings were done by NRA members, but whack jobs who should never have been permitted to have guns in the first place, and the NRA is in full agreement with that. The Florida debacle was the fault of all the local law enforcement and school administration officials ignoring all the warning signs of that whack job and letting him get away with walking in with a gun and not stopping him earlier.

too long already it should be dealt with

That's funny. Maybe the "anti gun" people should put their money where their mouth is, to counter the money the NRA supporters raise.

This comment was deleted by its author.
@2731075

That doesn't address my point, at all.

If you believe money is behind the decisions of the politicians ... then the way to "change their mind" is to raise more money for the other side. And if you believe the NRA doesn't represent the majority of Americans, this shouldn't be a problem.

Or just appeal to enough people to vote the politicians out of office. Nearly 1/3 of eligible Americans don't vote, so you have a lot of untapped election power there.

@Walt_OReagun That doesn't address my point, at all. If you believe money is behind the decisions of the politicians ... then...

I'm not a millionaire, are you? The NRA is a very rich organization, getting their riches through selling guns. And you know as well as I do that they pay off the politicians to do what they want. $30M to Trump for his campaign.....I don't know of any person or company that would do that.

And you're right, it's every American's right and duty to vote whichever way they want. But I can't make them vote, maybe you can.

@StarzAbove I'm not a millionaire, are you? The NRA is a very rich organization, getting their riches through selling guns...

The NRA doesn't sell guns.

NRA funding 2013:
$175,577,863 (50.5%) membership dues
$96.4 million (27.7%) private contributions / grants
$27.6 million (7.9%) unrelated business income
$24.5 million (7.0%) advertising income

According to an article in the Washington Post yesterday, NRA membership revenue spikes following mass shootings. So people actually pay to support the NRA after these incidents. According to the NRA's own figures, they have around 5 million members.

Given that the US population is around 326 million ... it shouldn't be that difficult to raise funds to outspend the NRA, if the majority of Americas disagree with the NRA.

This comment was deleted by its author.
@2731096

Define an "extensive" background check.
Every state I know of requires a background check against a state and federal database of criminals and mentally ill, in order to purchase a firearm from a licensed dealer. Unlicensed selling of firearms is already a crime, except between individuals. And states are changing it to even require background checks for transfers (not just sales) between individuals. (IE: passing a gun from father to son)

I highly doubt anyone talking about a ban has any idea what they're talking about, other than it sounds good to them.

Here's the problem with an assault weapons ban: Define an "assault weapon".

You can't do it on looks alone - for that is what was tried under Clinton. And all the gun manufacturers just changed the looks of the guns enough to get past the law.

Base it on mechanics (how the gun operates)? Not going to work either, since "assault weapons" generally operate the exact same way as hunting rifles. And if you narrow the definition enough to exclude hunting rifles, again the manufacturers just have to make a slight change to get around the ban.

Magazine capacity? Clinton's ban tried that, as well. People just bought high-capacity magazines that were manufactured before the ban. (And manufacturers "ramp up" production before the ban goes into effect.) Nor are gun magazines difficult to make in a garage workshop, for those inclined.

Ammunition caliber? Most "assault weapons" are available in a range of calibers - most of which are also hunting rounds.

For all those reasons, an outright ban is improbable. You might as well try to ban spending money in elections (which people keep trying, and it never works).

A more likely scenario, would be to do the same thing the US does on "silencers" and "machine guns" (full-auto firearms) - which anybody can technically buy. However, you have to pass a stricter federal background check than is required for other firearms - and pay a special tax.

Anonymous