A friend of mine brought his copy of a NRA magazine to work last week, and in it I saw this ad for a sweepstakes. The grand prize was, among other things, a rifle like this one.
Anyway, I got to wondering. What if the anti-gun people were to flood the contest with entries and one of them were to actually win the gun. The award includes a presentation dinner with ol’ Charlton himself.
Hoo Ha, (not you, aha) what a mess that would be!
This is a “no purchase neccessary” contest, so is there any way the NRA could, or should, keep this icon of the 2nd ammendment out of the hands of those who might desecrate it?
Would it be right for the anti-gun folks to do with it as they wanted? How about the awards dinner?
I’ll admit, I’d take a certain amount of glee in the ensuing
debacle. Philosophically speaking, of course.
As long as nobody got hurt.
Please, keep it friendly.
Peace,
mangeorge
It could also be an excellent opportunity for the NRA to do an expose’-type thingy about the hypocricy and deceitfulness that the gun-control types are willing to sink to.
Sounds like the basis of either a USA or TNT original movie; hopefully one of their better ones.
Umm, if someone wins the gun, they’re a gun owner. Which would make it rather hypocritical for them to be against gun ownership, wouldn’t it? Would you also discuss the hilarity that would ensue if an Amish person won a car sweapkstakes? Or if someone from PETA were to win a fur coat?
Sure! An Amish anti-gun PETA member wearing a fur in a new Dodge truck with a gun rack in the back window would be a sight to see.
My topic of discussion here, though I phrased it poorly, is about how the NRA would react to a “Million Mom” mom winning the rifle.
Peace,
mangeorge
No way would I pay $1850 for a lever-action 30-30 rifle, even if it did have a pretty receiver. Heck, they don’t even tell you how many rounds the internal magazine can hold.
