# Fuck the NRA **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 1, 2015, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184 "2015-10-01T23:02:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![velomont](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/8491ac/32.png) [@velomont](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/velomont)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/161 "2015-10-03T19:25:22Z")
From an outsider’s perspective (I’m Canadian) I truly don’t know what the answer is but I don’t necessarily believe that gun laws of any sort would necessarily help. ISTM that there is a significant cultural aspect to this on both sides of our border. I suspect that if Canada had no gun laws whatsoever, our levels of gun violence might rise a bit but no-where near to levels in proportion to yours. Generally, most of us just don’t have the mindset about guns that the US has. I don’t even know if we are anti-gun. Instead, it’s almost as though they never enter our imaginations except as practical tools for hunters and farmers. Conversely, I think that your way of thinking about guns (and I don’t mean that each and every American is like this) is so passionate and symbolic that I don’t think that a draconian set of gun laws would reduce gun violence in the US to any significant extent. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/162 "2015-10-03T19:27:49Z")
> [@andros](#): > > As would I, for the most part. > > I suspect we differ, however, in how we define “freely keep and bear.” I am perfectly happy to require myself and my fellow citizens to take safety classes, pass background checks (within very clear constraints), maintain insurance, and even register our firearms. Those are the compromises I am quite comfortable with in order to change the firearm culture in my society in a way that makes everyone safer. Yup … these compromises do not limit gun ownership for those entitled. However, what will make everyone safer is when these laws are enforced. Just making it illegal to bring guns onto college campuses doesn’t stop the violence … fences and security checkpoints stops the violence. Not one single law protects the public from people who willingly break the law. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/163 "2015-10-03T19:52:24Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > This thread is about how the NRA is an evil organization because it fights infringements of gun rights tooth and nail and won’t come to some reasonable compromise middle position with gun control advocates. I’m having trouble finding information on fully automatic weapons + crime. I assume your claims are correct, in other words, if there was significant data to indicate fully automatic weapons were commonly used in crime, I’m sure it would be very easy to find that information. So, I’d say you’ve made a very good point here and at least on first analysis I agree with you. I also think, however, that just as blind and dogmatic as the anti gun people are, so too is the NRA but on the other side. I am not aware of any significant gun control policies they endorse. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/164 "2015-10-03T19:56:14Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > It’s always pretty baffling to me how gun control advocates like to bring up this as an example, since it works so hard against them and exposes their true agenda. . . . As **Gary Kunquat** said to **Canned Mayhem** , it refutes a point someone made. They argued that gun control can’t work, because drug control didn’t work. But gun control does work, and we’ve given two examples: control in other nations, and control of some classes of guns, notably fully automatic weapons. You can’t say, “It won’t work” as a general principle, because it does work, both abroad and here. The argument doesn’t work against me; it works against you. That’s why you’re baffled: you’re quite wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/165 "2015-10-03T20:01:39Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > This thread is about how the NRA is an evil organization because it fights infringements of gun rights tooth and nail and won’t come to some reasonable compromise middle position with gun control advocates. There is one flaw in your example. If fully automatic weapons became as popular as say, highly powered rifles, rifles strong enough to kill a moose or a grizzle bear, would incidents of crime with automatic weapons increase? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/166 "2015-10-03T20:18:18Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Hey, maybe _that’s the answer_ - whenever some law-abiding citizen is killed with a gun, have it set up so that a random gun owner gets killed, too. We put your names in a drum, and when a dozen students at a community college get killed by some nut, we spin the drum, pick a dozen names out, and we line 'em up against a wall and pop! goes the weasel. Gun-control advocate wants to punish the innocent for what the guilty do; film at 11. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/167 "2015-10-03T20:26:34Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Gun-control advocate wants to punish the innocent for what the guilty do; film at 11. lol is it a punishment that not anyone can drive a tractor trailer down a busy crowded street? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/168 "2015-10-03T20:30:57Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > lol > > is it a punishment that not anyone can drive a tractor trailer down a busy crowded street? No, but – what’d be the analogy, here? Calling for the deaths of those who responsibly operate tractor trailers whenever someone _else_ drives one illegally? ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/169 "2015-10-03T20:37:31Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > No, but – what’d be the analogy, here? Calling for the deaths of those who responsibly operate tractor trailers whenever someone _else_ drives one illegally? I don’t know but since you seem to want to talk about this reasonably, my point is that we have restrictions on who can operate what type of automobile or other types of machinery. If it is good for one category it is good for another. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/170 "2015-10-03T20:49:29Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > I don’t know but since you seem to want to talk about this reasonably, my point is that we have restrictions on who can operate what type of automobile or other types of machinery. If it is good for one category it is good for another. And the point of the post I’d quoted and replied to was, y’know, zanier than that. Your (admittedly more reasonable) proposal, though, is going to come up against the oft-mentioned wall of how there ain’t a Constitutional Amendment saying the right of the people to own and operate vehicles shall not be infringed; it’s more like what’s good for, say, freedom of speech, or religion: until we further amend that pesky Constitution, we can’t restrict _those_ rights to folks who underwent specialized licensing requirements before re-testing 'em and charging 'em a fee on a regular basis, and, shucks, what’s good for one category is good for another, amirite? ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Kumquat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gary\_Kumquat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Kumquat)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/171 "2015-10-03T20:50:58Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Gun-control advocate wants to punish the innocent for what the guilty do; film at 11. As a particularly splendid Australian comedian pointed out, most laws have to be based around the fact that people are idiots. I drive like a boss after two bottles of wine, but funnily enough there’s lots of laws designed to curtail this behaviour on the grounds that other people will fuck up. Shameful I know, and costs me a fortune in taxis, but I suck it up and don’t whine about the innocent being punished because of what the guilty do. So out of interest, do you see this as a law intended to “punish the innocent for what the guilty do”? ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/172 "2015-10-03T20:59:04Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > And the point of the post I’d quoted and replied to was, y’know, zanier than that. > > Your (admittedly more reasonable) proposal, though, is going to come up against the oft-mentioned wall of how there ain’t a Constitutional Amendment saying the right of the people to own and operate vehicles shall not be infringed; it’s more like what’s good for, say, freedom of speech, or religion: until we further amend that pesky Constitution, we can’t restrict _those_ rights to folks who underwent specialized licensing requirements before re-testing 'em and charging 'em a fee on a regular basis, and, shucks, what’s good for one category is good for another, amirite? Yes, except that I don’t hold the constitution to be sacrosanct. The constitution, after all, supports slavery. Or at the very least, reluctantly accepts it… the 3/5 clause. and were not there many legal debates in the early 1800’s about admitting a state as a slave state or a free state. So, am I correct in saying the constitution supports slavery? I recognize the bill of rights has more significance than other amendments… but still, to me, at the end of the day, it’s a piece of paper over 250 years old. The problem is, not many other people feel that way. It was pointed out here or on another thread by a Canadian that guns are such a deeply entrenched pat of American culture that doing anything to reform the situation will be very very hard. I agree with this. But, I can still hold a position even if it is going to be hard to implement. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Kumquat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gary\_Kumquat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Kumquat)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/173 "2015-10-03T20:59:51Z")
> [@Crafter\_Man](#): > > My position is this: I would rather have the murder rate remain exactly what it is than give up my right to freely keep and bear arms. I honestly believe you are sincere in this position, and you have weighed up the costs involved, and feel they are worth paying. As such, I also honestly hope that the next time an event like this happens that a loved one of yours is amongst the victims. I appreciate this might sound vindictive but there is no malice in this statement. It is so you can show that you are truly prepared to pay the costs for your beliefs, and are not a hypocrite. You will be able to demonstrate beyond all doubt that the right to freely keep and bear arms is something you cherish, whatever the murder rate. It is also so that a person who disagrees with this position doesn’t pay the price for your beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Kumquat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gary\_Kumquat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Kumquat)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/174 "2015-10-03T21:02:38Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > there ain’t a Constitutional Amendment saying the right of the people to own and operate vehicles shall not be infringed; it’s more like what’s good for, say, freedom of speech, or religion: until we further amend that pesky Constitution, we can’t restrict _those_ rights to folks who underwent specialized licensing requirements before re-testing 'em and charging 'em a fee on a regular basis Apologies if I’m being whooshed on a massive basis, but are you arguing that the initial amendments are beyond reproach, but further amendments would be bad? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/175 "2015-10-03T21:08:04Z")
> [@Gary\_Kumquat](#): > > So out of interest, do you see this as a law intended to “punish the innocent for what the guilty do”? Out of curiosity, what do you make of **RTFirefly** ’s claim, which prompted my reply? Would you figure _that_ was so intended? [QUOTE=Robert163] Yes, except that I don’t hold the constitution to be sacrosanct. [/QUOTE] I don’t think anyone does; if the votes are there, it’ll be amended. I merely note that, when comparing significantly similar categories in a what’s-good-for-one approach, maybe compare the one _currently_ enshrined to another one that’s currently enshrined, and not to one that can be regulated on a legislative whim. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/176 "2015-10-03T21:10:27Z")
> [@Gary\_Kumquat](#): > > Apologies if I’m being whooshed on a massive basis, but are you arguing that the initial amendments are beyond reproach, but further amendments would be bad? Not at all; I’d wholeheartedly get behind amending one of the initial ones. I merely note that the rights currently protected by _any_ of the Amendments – initial or later, it makes no difference – are easily comparable to each other, and less so to other stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Kumquat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gary\_Kumquat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Kumquat)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/177 "2015-10-03T21:16:17Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Out of curiosity, what do you make of **RTFirefly** ’s claim, which prompted my reply? Would you figure _that_ was so intended? Can’t answer for RTFirefly, but his reply seems like a blatantly sarcastic response to the wonderfully nonsensical ‘“machine guns” sound scary to the general public’ comment he replied to. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/178 "2015-10-03T21:25:51Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Wow, I don’t know if you could serve as any better proof to my point. Gun control proponent completely emotionally motivated, looking to stick it to go gun owners rather than make any sort of good-faith effort to discuss public policy. There’s never been a time in my recollection when the NRA, or gun proponents generally, were ever looking for some sort of win-win compromise. You know, us gun-control types don’t know as much about guns as you pro-gun types, for obvious reasons. We just want the U.S. to be a place where these sorts of shootings don’t happen anymore, and we certainly don’t have to worry, when we go over and ask some guy at the next table who’s making a scene to tone it down a little, about whether or not he’s carrying, and might perforate us to death after telling us he “feels fear” or whatever the magic SYG words are. So when we get into these conversations, we get shit when we call a clip a magazine, or vice versa, and are told that we don’t know enough to engage in a conversation about gun control. Which actually is what you spent a chunk of your “measured, well-reasoned” post doing. But never do i see you guys using your superior knowledge about guns to try to come up with solutions. For instance, to take your example, has the NRA ever said, “OK, we’ll join you in outlawing ammo that can pierce body armor when fired from _handguns?_” I doubt it. > [@](#): > > You wonder why the NRA is always fighting against infringements on gun rights - because, in response to my measured, well-reasoned post, this is the response. Maybe I accidentally quoted someone else, not you? ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/179 "2015-10-03T21:26:55Z")
> [@Gary\_Kumquat](#): > > As such, I also honestly hope that the next time an event like this happens that a loved one of yours is amongst the victims. I appreciate this might sound vindictive but there is no malice in this statement. The fuck there isn’t. Wishing death on someone’s loved ones is _axiomatically_ fucking malicious. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2015, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184/180 "2015-10-03T21:32:19Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Gun-control advocate wants to punish the innocent for what the guilty do; film at 11. No, that was offered more in the vein of “A Modest Proposal.” I’m not that bloodthirsty, thanks. But let’s phrase it this way: a whole bunch of other people each year are forced to pay the bill for gun-lovers’ “freedoms.” Freedom isn’t free, but you guys have offloaded the costs onto random third parties. There really ought to be a way of making the bill arrive at the right address, so that y’all can think about whether that freedom is really worth it if YOU have to pay the damn bill. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-the-nra/733184.md?page=10)