The NRA supports efforts to ban the sale of assault rifles now? Have they ever supported anything even remotely related to reducing access to some kind of firearm, no matter how reasonable the limitation might be?
Until they do it seems to me that they (and apparently by association, you) will have to endure assumptions like Waterman’s.
The NRA supports keeping firearms of all types out of the hands of crazy, violent fucks. The perpetrator here has a history of being such. That’s the only comment about the NRA which has any validity in the incident under discussion. And just in case the facts of the story have eluded you, that crazy, violent fucker shot the football coach with a goddamned handgun. Assualt weapons (whatever they are) simply are not germane to this conversation. I see no reason I have to endure asinine and ill-informed assumptions by anyone.
You may now join Waterman in fucking the hell off. You guys gotta problem with the NRA, take to a thread where the NRA is part of the topic at hand and I’ll show exactly the kind of legislation they support. Frankly, I think you, and about a hundred other people here, could use the education.
When it says NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre disagrees with both groups, isn’t it saying he disagrees with the FBI for granting members of terrorists groups access to the weapons? That’s how I read it. Do you read it otherwise?
It suggests to me the NRA feels that the FBI/Congress should make gun access to members of those groups illegal, not to simply add additional laws that would prevent access to law abiding citizens or make further intrusions into their privacy.
What I note from your posted quotation, is that it is gun control groups telling us which measures the NRA supports and what the effects of those measures are. I see no reason to take their assertions as fact in this matter.
[quote] Gun control advocates argue that current gun laws favor gun owners’ privacy rights lobbied by the powerful National Rifle Association, or NRA, and give suspected terrorists an opportunity to evade scrutiny while obtaining weapons.
Perhaps you’d like to provide us with a link to that article so I can comment on it in full? I hesitate to say more without full information.
Ya know what, stpauler, never mind. Don’t bother with that link - at least in this thread. As I said before, discussion of NRA supported legislation has not one single goddamned thing to do with the topic at hand, except for the very limited facet which I pointed out earlier.
You wanna discuss the aspects of the NRA, go start a thread - either here, or in GD (GD being my preference, but I’m willing to have a damned free-for-all here in the Pit, too) - and I’ll respond. I’m done talking about the NRA in this thread.
I read the article as indicating that Wayne LaPierre disagrees with both FBI Director Mueller’s assessment that the laws need to be changed, and the gun control advocates’ assessment that the current legal framework allows terrorists to evade gun-control laws. Of course La Pierre is going to disagree with the thought of allowing members of terrorist groups to have guns - everyone who isn’t a terrorist disagrees with that - it’s just that he feels the current laws are adequate.
I’ll take Mueller’s assessment of the current adequacy of our gun control laws over LaPierre’s any day of the week.
Interesting. I’d enjoy seeing a discussion of this as well, even though as a general rule I’ve done my best to avoid NRA threads in the past. You should take UncleBeer up on his suggestion.