# By golly, the NRA may be right! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 17, 2013, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605 "2013-02-17T17:55:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/141 "2013-02-24T03:09:12Z")
> [@solosam](#): > > Here’s the bottom line: If the government doesn’t have a list of who own guns, they have no way to find the guns when/if they attempt to confiscate them, and have to go about searching for them the hard way. If the government has a handy-dandy registration list, confiscation becomes much, much easier. This falls under the no shit Sherlock school of thought. We get the point, just many of us voters think this point is asinine. 😃 > [@solosam](#): > > In America we have this thing called a “Court” and a “Trial.” If someone gets caught illegally possessing a weapon, there are these people called “Police” who ask them where they got it. If the suspect names me, these “Police” people we hear so much about do this thing they call an “investigation.” And if there were universal registration of all owners and sales of firearms, it would be hella lot easier for the “Police” to do their job with all due legal procedure of tracking down the gun owner who may have sold on the weapon knowingly when it is illegal. Certainly a lot easier than the situation where I could go locate a firearm no questions asked on the interwebs and pay cold cash anonymously in a McD’s parking lot. > [@Kable](#): > > And if registration etc., didn’t bring deaths down to an “acceptable” level, what would be your next step? What’s an “acceptable” number of firearm related murders anyway? I honestly don’t know what the next step would be, but it will be more until firearm murders came down. That’s the nature of many things, make the first step, check the results, course change if needed. What’s acceptable? I don’t know. I do know that 4x the nearest rate in the G-7 G-20 is not acceptable. I’d \*prefer \*the US of A to be a leader in having the lowest firearm murder rate of the G-20. Like I’ve said before, being on parity with England would be acceptable. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/142 "2013-02-24T03:22:34Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#): > > I honestly don’t know what the next step would be, but it will be more until firearm murders came down. What in your opinion would be a good next step, or series of steps? Would you ban any particular firearms? > [@](#): > > What’s acceptable? I don’t know. I do know that 4x the nearest rate in the G-7 G-20 is not acceptable. I’d \*prefer \*the US of A to be a leader in having the lowest firearm murder rate of the G-20. Like I’ve said before, being on parity with England would be acceptable. Do you think gun registration will get you there? ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/143 "2013-02-24T04:15:21Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Their weapons don’t get used by criminals, and that’s the most important thing to responsible law-abiding patriotic gun owners who don’t hate America and side with terrorists. So you are as full of shit as you claim the NRA to be. Thanks for clearing that up. By the way, it doesn’t take NFA regs to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/144 "2013-02-24T04:33:06Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > What in your opinion would be a good next step, or series of steps? Would you ban any particular firearms? > > Do you think gun registration will get you there? Honestly hope that we don’t need to try figure out what the next step would be. Universal registration should help both for a legal chain of evidence for guns used in crimes, and over time non-registered guns should decline. Combine that with giving the ATF or the FBI or someone the funding to enforce all the laws on the books. What else? Maybe requiring insurance as well. But I think if you have universal registration, then the insurance is redundant. Now if you want to argue that the costs to society from firearms (whether legally owned or previously legally owned that are now underground) should be recouped in part by insurance, that’s a different debate. I’ve learned on these boards and from researching what is generally attributed to firearm deaths that limiting certain weapons isn’t really effective. In fact, I’d say Feinstein almost seems in cohorts with the NRA for what the result is from her “assault style” attempts are likely to achieve. Taking cheap handguns off the streets would probably provide a much greater ROI if you’re going to ban something. But that’s just a wag rather than anything I’ve researched. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/145 "2013-02-24T05:25:00Z")
> [@JXJohns](#): > > So you are as full of shit as you claim the NRA to be. Thanks for clearing that up. By the way, it doesn’t take NFA regs to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. No other gun law has worked in the US, so it’s what we have to work with. If it seems a bit harsh, maybe you should come up with something that actually works instead of clinging to a jury rigged system designed to hemorrhage guns into the black market. People have noticed. You might be able to keep your hunting rifles and shotguns unregistered if you give up handguns and whatever we decide is a scary assault weapon. Those have to be registered and traceable by computer in seconds. Hope we don’t have too many more spectacular shooting disasters in the meantime. ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/146 "2013-02-24T05:57:12Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > No other gun law has worked in the US, so it’s what we have to work with. > > If it seems a bit harsh, maybe you should come up with something that actually works instead of clinging to a jury rigged system designed to hemorrhage guns into the black market. People have noticed. I’ve made my suggestions in about a dozen threads lately. I tire of repeating myself. Here’s the deal, there are probably close to 400,000,000 guns in private possession now. The overwhelming majority of them are never used in anger or in accident. You want to attack gun violence? Attack the reasons for the violence, not the tools used. > [@](#): > > You might be able to keep your hunting rifles and shotguns unregistered if you give up handguns and whatever we decide is a scary assault weapon. Those have to be registered and traceable by computer in seconds. > > Hope we don’t have too many more spectacular shooting disasters in the meantime. Appreciate the attempt at humor. If you haven’t noticed your “we” hasn’t passed anything significant at the Federal level in about 20 years, which was allowed to expire because it was a turd. About the best that will be passed by your “we” this round will be a diluted version of universal background checks. Word has it that the BG checks will be waived if the buyers own a [concealed weapons permit](http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/senators-near-a-deal-on-background-checks-for-most-private-gun-sales/2013/02/23/d55e5f4a-7d0c-11e2-82e8-61a46c2cde3d_story.html?hpid=z2). So, similar to Obama being responsible for [65 million guns sold since 2009](http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/654-million-gun-purchases-obama-took-office-91-more-bushs-first-term), if this background check legislation is passed, I would wager that the number of concealed weapons permits would rise significantly in the country in order to be exempted from the increased BG checks. Every anti gunner’s dream right? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/147 "2013-02-24T06:54:15Z")
> [@solosam](#): > > Remember the time the ATF sold all those guns to Mexico, with no idea how they were going to control or recover them, and ended up getting Americans shot? Yeah. That. Yeah, that bothered me because of the incompetence, I’m not sure where the corruption and “arbitrariness” was. This is valid law enforcement strategy if correctly executed. Gun walking without any way of keeping track of the guns is bad execution not corruption. > [@](#): > > Saying “You are simply wrong” is not an argument. We can play the “Is not / Is too” game all day long, but until you actually explain your reasoning you have contributed nothing. Tyrannies confiscate guns without a registry. So registries are not a necessary. > [@](#): > > Here’s the bottom line: If the government doesn’t have a list of who own guns, they have no way to find the guns when/if they attempt to confiscate them, and have to go about searching for them the hard way. If the government has a handy-dandy registration list, confiscation becomes much, much easier. Yeah but it can be done without the registry and it HAS been done without the registry. The tyranny you fear isn’t going to be stopped because they don’t have a registry. > [@](#): > > I’m not saying the government is going to confiscate them today, or tomorrow. My point is that preventing registration is how we keep it that way. That is ONE way (its not a constitutionally protected way but a way that depends on having a political majority at every point in time between now and then). The other way is to have a constitutional right to bear arms, OMG would you look at that, we have one. For example, we have had a national registry for machine guns for the last 80 years. We know where almost every last machine gun in the United states is located, we know who owns them and we even know when they cross state lines. In the 80 years since we gathered this information, we have not confiscated these weapons, not even once. On the other hand, registration creates a chain of title so that you know who last legally owned the gun before it was used in a crime. If that person keeps coming up as the last person to own a gun before it is used in a crime, we might have more than an unlucky law-abiding gun owner on our hands. > [@](#): > > In America we have this thing called a “Court” and a “Trial.” If someone gets caught illegally possessing a weapon, there are these people called “Police” who ask them where they got it. If the suspect names me, these “Police” people we hear so much about do this thing they call an “investigation.” And what if the suspect doesn’t name names? What does “court” and “trial” have to do with it? > [@](#): > > Associated concepts are “probable cause” and “reasonable suspicion.” If any of this is strange and foreign to you, I recommend reading a CJ textbook. If you do not have one, any episode of “Law and Order” can demonstrate it. I took a class that covered these topics a long time ago. What does “probable cause” and “reasonable suspicion” have to do with it? > [@](#): > > If these “Police” people come to my door and ask questions about my guns, they need this incredible and under-utilized document called a “Warrant.” When they produce one of these documents, I will happily answer questions about my guns and who I have or have not sold them to. What if you don’t know? You aren’t required to keep this information, you could literally just sell your gun to some guy you just met in a parking lot. Where do “warrants” come into the conversation? > [@](#): > > This brings us back to the original point of OP, and the fact that the police don’t get to come pawing through my house (or asking me questions about my property) without a reason. And what does that have to do with a gun registry? Or did you think that a gun registry allowed the police to come pawing through your house? It almost seems like you are under the impression that forcing you to register is a criminal penalty. One that should require conviction of a crime after due process, I don’t know this for sure but judging by the words and phrases you were throwing around, you seem to think that a registry is a form of criminalization of gun ownership. Its not, no more than car registration is criminalization of car ownership. Its not criminalization, its a bit of a pain in the ass but its not punishment or criminalization. > [@Kable](#): > > What in your opinion would be a good next step, or series of steps? Would you ban any particular firearms? > > Do you think gun registration will get you there? Yes, I think licensing AND registration would get us there eventually. It would take a decade or so but then again so would a complete ban on firearm sales in the United States (which is why I don’t understand why folks on the left resist this idea). Tell you what, lets try a 20 year licensing and registration period and if it looks like its working, we make it permanent, we lift repeal the NFA and you can buy a surplus M-16 at your local McDonald’s parking lot for a few thousand dollars and your license acts as a CCW nationwide. If it doesn’t work we just let the law lapse. > [@JXJohns](#): > > So you are as full of shit as you claim the NRA to be. Thanks for clearing that up. By the way, it doesn’t take NFA regs to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. OK, what does it take? ---
**Author:** ![the\_diego](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@the\_diego](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/the_diego)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 7:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/148 "2013-02-24T07:00:51Z")
A bit like your parole officer sort of thing. If the visit is constructive, why not? Nothing wrong with entertaining public officers. They’ll probably keep coming back for my chicken soup and beef stroganoff. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/149 "2013-02-24T13:41:14Z")
> [@JXJohns](#): > > So, similar to Obama being responsible for [65 million guns sold since 2009](http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/654-million-gun-purchases-obama-took-office-91-more-bushs-first-term), if this background check legislation is passed, I would wager that the number of concealed weapons permits would rise significantly in the country in order to be exempted from the increased BG checks. Every anti gunner’s dream right? Gun nuts start panic buying guns, especially assault weapons, every time a Democrat gets elected or reelected and every time there is a mass shooting. There’s been lots of both, so gun nutter panic buying is brisk. Also, don’t forget that as long as you or your straw buyer can pass the instant check, you can buy more guns every 24 hours so a lot of those background checks are the same buyers, rather than all new buyers. Overall gun ownership is still trending down, and has been for decades. Concealed carry permits are almost always harder to get with stricter conditions and background checks than the usual buyer’s instant check, so if people want to run out and go through the extra education, training and background checks because they think they’re getting over on the instant check that would be awesome. Penalties are harsher for CC gun owners, no booze, can’t go to bars or restaurants that serve alchohol, etc. Concealed Carry forces gun owners to be more responsible gun owners. What’s not to like? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/150 "2013-02-24T19:13:56Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Allowing gun manufacturers to put guns right into the hands of children and criminals is reasonable? As **solosam** already noted, most of those restrictions are to prevent de facto registration. If we’re to have registration, it should be via an act of Congress, not a backdoor system carried out by a federal agency. > [@levdrakon](#): > > That’s funny, because they say they are. Weird. Cite? > [@levdrakon](#): > > Only after they made sure it would allow untold thousands of disqualified criminals to buy guns anyway. Duh. And it’s the _only_ example. Barely works, hardly any funding, states don’t bother inputing more than a fraction of the data needed, and forget about the dangerously mentally ill with documented court-ordered institutionalizations. Nope. They get guns. They also, per the NRA-ILA website and [this article](http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/news-from-nra-ila/2012/12/victory-for-self-defense-and-the-second-amendment.aspx), support a permitting process and background check for concealed carry. Again, the NRA does not set budgets for agencies, nor do they determine how much effort state governments put into keeping NICBC data current. > [@levdrakon](#): > > You write as if the NRA is really just a harmless sub-set of the Boy Scouts. They are just a lobbying organization, not the Illuminati. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/151 "2013-02-24T20:42:16Z")
This just in: the administration’s own advisers say background checks, assault weapon bans and magazine size limits will do little or nothing to curb gun violence: > **[NRA uses Justice memo to accuse Obama on guns](https://www.inquirer.com/philly/news/nation_world/20130224_NRA_uses_Justice_memo_to_accuse_Obama_on_guns.html)** > > WASHINGTON - The National Rifle Association is using a Justice Department memo it obtained to argue in ads that the Obama administration believes its gun control plans won't work unless the government seizes firearms and requires national gun... ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/152 "2013-02-24T22:33:57Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > As **solosam** already noted, most of those restrictions are to prevent de facto registration. If we’re to have registration, it should be via an act of Congress, not a backdoor system carried out by a federal agency. As already noted, the restrictions are to ensure criminals, children and violent mental patients can have all the guns they want. No gun laws; guns for everybody. > [@](#): > > They also, per the NRA-ILA website and [this article](http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/news-from-nra-ila/2012/12/victory-for-self-defense-and-the-second-amendment.aspx), support a permitting process and background check for concealed carry. Do you read your own cites? They usurped the constitution to suit their own end of putting guns into criminal hands with no restrictions. That article says nothing about permitting or bg checks. These are the guys who trample all over the 1st amendment in order to put guns in everyone’s hands in the name of the 2nd. > [@](#): > > Again, the NRA does not set budgets for agencies, nor do they determine how much effort state governments put into keeping NICBC data current. Are you serious? The NRA slaps riders all over ATF’s funding and you claim they don’t? > [@](#): > > They are just a lobbying organization, not the Illuminati. Actually, at this point it’s pretty clear that guns are God and the NRA is religion. Time to get that out of government. > [@](#): > > This just in: the administration’s own advisers say background checks, assault weapon bans and magazine size limits will do little or nothing to curb gun violence: > > [http://www.philly.com/philly/news/na...a\_on\_guns.html](http://www.philly.com/philly/news/na...a_on_guns.html) First paragraph says it all: NRA uses memo to falsely accuse Obama of something the White House has not proposed and does not support. That’s what they do. Lie to paranoid gun worshipers and spread fear. If they were a Muslim org doing this shit they’d have been rounded up as terrorists by now. Let’s not pretend they[represent gun owners or their own members](http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/12/15/1341181/the-5-sensible-gun-safety-regulations-that-even-nra-members-support/): > [@](#): > > gun advocates overwhelmingly support common-sense measures typically described as “gun control.” These include: > > 1. Requiring criminal background checks on gun owners and gun shop employees. 82 percent of all gun owners and 74 percent of NRA gun owners support the former, and 80 percent and 79 percent, respectively, endorse the latter. > > 2. Prohibiting terrorist watch list members from acquiring guns. Support ranges from 80 percent among non-NRA gun-owners to 71 percent among NRA members. > > 3. Mandating that gun-owners tell the police when their gun is stolen. 71 percent non-NRA gun-owners support this measure, as do 64 percent of NRA members. > > 4. Concealed carry permits should only be restricted to individuals who have completed a safety training course and are 21 and older. 84 percent of non-NRA and 74 percent of NRA member gun-owners support the safety training restriction, and the numbers are 74 percent and 63 percent for the age restriction. > > 5.Concealed carry permits shouldn’t be given to perpetrators of violent misdemeanors or individuals arrested for domestic violence. The NRA/non-NRA gun-owner split on these issues is 81 percent and 75 percent in favor of the violent misdemeanors provision and 78 percent/68 percent in favor of the domestic violence restriction. > > The poll, which sampled 945 gun owners around the country and had a margin of error of +/- 3, also found broad support gun-owners for the principle that “support for 2nd Amendment rights goes hand-in-hand with keeping illegal guns out of the hands of criminals.” In fact, more NRA members (87 percent) supported the statement than non-NRA members (83 percent). ---
**Author:** ![jasg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/153 "2013-02-24T23:19:35Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > This just in: the administration’s own advisers say background checks, assault weapon bans and magazine size limits will do little or nothing to curb gun violence: > > [NRA uses Justice memo to accuse Obama on guns](http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/20130224_NRA_uses_Justice_memo_to_accuse_Obama_on_guns.html) A draft of a DOJ study that was leaked to the NRA and used in a multi-state ad campaign… Seriously??? What happened to the NRA I grew up with? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2013, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/154 "2013-02-24T23:35:27Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > As already noted, the restrictions are to ensure criminals, children and violent mental patients can have all the guns they want. No gun laws; guns for everybody. If you want gun registration, support a registration law. The ATF is empowered to enforce laws, not create them. > [@levdrakon](#): > > Do you read your own cites? They usurped the constitution to suit their own end of putting guns into criminal hands with no restrictions. That article says nothing about permitting or bg checks. These are the guys who trample all over the 1st amendment in order to put guns in everyone’s hands in the name of the 2nd. Private organizations cannot usurp the Constitution, I have no idea what you mean by that. The NRA does indeed support permits for concealed carry: [Right-To-Carry 2012](http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/articles/2012/right-to-carry-2012.aspx) [Support for shall-issue permits in Alabama](http://www.nraila.org/legislation/state-legislation/2013/2/alabama-nra-supported-omnibus-firearms-bill-referred-to-senate-working-committee.aspx) So, any support at all for your claim that the NRA says they are against all rules and regulations? > [@levdrakon](#): > > Are you serious? The NRA slaps riders all over ATF’s funding and you claim they don’t? You are using “NRA”, “Congress” and “state legislatures and agencies” interchangeably here. No, the NRA has no power to pass Congressional budget items or to control whether states bother to update NICBC data. > [@levdrakon](#): > > Actually, at this point it’s pretty clear that guns are God and the NRA is religion. Time to get that out of government. Then support candidates with gun policies that you agree with. The NRA is engaged in lawful lobbying activity, nothing more. > [@levdrakon](#): > > First paragraph says it all: NRA uses memo to falsely accuse Obama of something the White House has not proposed and does not support. That’s what they do. Lie to paranoid gun worshipers and spread fear. If they were a Muslim org doing this shit they’d have been rounded up as terrorists by now. What an awful country we must live in, rounding up Muslims for publishing opinions. > [@levdrakon](#): > > Let’s not pretend they[represent gun owners or their own members](http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/12/15/1341181/the-5-sensible-gun-safety-regulations-that-even-nra-members-support/): That’s between NRA members and leadership. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2013, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/155 "2013-02-25T00:02:50Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Overall gun ownership is still trending down, and has been for decades. Actually that’s not true: > **[Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993](https://news.gallup.com/poll/150353/Self-Reported-Gun-Ownership-Highest-1993.aspx)** > > Forty-seven percent of American adults currently report that they have a gun in their home or elsewhere on their property. This is up from 41% a year ago and is the highest Gallup has recorded since 1993. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2013, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/156 "2013-02-25T01:29:10Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Actually that’s not true: > > [Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993](http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/Self-Reported-Gun-Ownership-Highest-1993.aspx) [This is more recent](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/12/19/a-gun-ownership-renaissance/). There has been a recent uptick, but with all the mass shootings and gun debates it’s not that unusual. Assault weapons are really moving which isn’t surprising at all. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2013, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/157 "2013-02-25T04:55:57Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Concealed Carry forces gun owners to be more responsible gun owners. What’s not to like? Now imagine if everyone who OWNED a gun had to meet those criteria? Sure it would mean that gun owners would have nationwide carry rights but so what? > [@Lumpy](#): > > This just in: the administration’s own advisers say background checks, assault weapon bans and magazine size limits will do little or nothing to curb gun violence: > > [NRA uses Justice memo to accuse Obama on guns](http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/20130224_NRA_uses_Justice_memo_to_accuse_Obama_on_guns.html) I agree that a background check alone would be only very mildly effective without registration. I think any of the bans are a retarded waste of political capital. With 3D printers, I can now extend almost any magazine. > [@jasg](#): > > What happened to the NRA I grew up with? Its been like this for decades. > [@levdrakon](#): > > [This is more recent](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/12/19/a-gun-ownership-renaissance/). > > There has been a recent uptick, but with all the mass shootings and gun debates it’s not that unusual. Assault weapons are really moving which isn’t surprising at all. The price of assault weapons are down significantly from their highs. Extended magazines are still very overpriced and thegeneral pricing on firearms is higher than they were in November. TTis should all die down in 6 months or so ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2013, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/158 "2013-02-25T13:21:53Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > This is more recent. It’s the exact same data. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2013, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/159 "2013-02-25T16:31:20Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > It’s the exact same data. I think the administration could be learning a few things from this information. The increase in gun ownership isn’t coming from Republicans, its coming from Democrats. The number of guns might have increased among Republican gun owners but the increase in households with guns are largely coming form the Democrat side. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2013, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605/160 "2013-02-25T18:22:10Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I think the administration could be learning a few things from this information. The increase in gun ownership isn’t coming from Republicans, its coming from Democrats. The number of guns might have increased among Republican gun owners but the increase in households with guns are largely coming form the Democrat side. Possibly because Republicans are mostly armed already. 😛 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/by-golly-the-nra-may-be-right/650605.md?page=9)