Can you provide a cite that show’s I’m anti-gun? I have, more than once, declared that the 2nd Amendment should be simplified so that there is no ambiguity by taking out the “well-regulated militia” part entirely. I have stated that I grew up with guns.
If you have no problem with their gathering information about you, you are free to volunteer such information to them.
Did you read the article I linked to in post #13 to see what information they are gathering, how they are gathering it, and the fact that they won’t say why they are gathering it?
Perhaps ACORN could help with the registrations.
Regards,
Shodan
Wow! did you think of that all on your own? How very topical of you.
I have. What’s your beef with it? Are you upset that some ignorant people signed up for NRA classes without realizing that their registration information might be used to solicit donations in the future? Or that some people applied for permits in non-privacy-respecting-states and then had their personal information utilized to market NRA’s services to them?
This thread is my cite. You oppose the NRA, which is the organization who just about single handedly is responsible for gun ownership to exist.
Every time there is a gun debate on this board you are solidly on the anti-gun side of the argument, despite batting your eyelashes and insisting that you aren’t anti-gun.
In the post above mine just now you say you are against registration. But when we last discussed a specific proposal for registration, back in this thread in December you were arguing on the other side of the issue.
Your first post to that thread:
If this is you fighting on my side against registration, you really aren’t very good at it.
It is for fund raising, membership and marketing purposes. I am in marketing (not for the NRA) - we buy lists all of the time. I buy them, I sponsor things to get names, I swap names with other companies, I post stuff behind a registration wall to get your name, and I run educational events for professional Continuing Education credits in exchange for the list of attendees.
All of that so that I can make money.
I don’t seen an ulterior motive. I do agree that it puts a lot of information in one place that an anti-gun government could use - but I assume (especially in this post-Snowden revelation world) that the government would have me in their cross hairs pretty fast regardless (ex-military, party registration of libertarian/republican at different points, purchased and sold firearms in California).
Or that people who attend gun shows might not know that their registration information might be sold to the NRA? Yeah, all this ticks me off.
You still going on with this “Anti NRA = Anti Gun” crap?
By the way, Debaser, it’s easy to see by actually reading the thread that I wasn’t so much arguing for gun registration as I was arguing against your faulty reasoning.
Shrug I don’t mind, and, I suspect, most gun owners do not. From your article:
The NRA’s efforts are no more interesting or noteworthy than any large company’s marketing department to me. Just curious though: what would your preference be? Would you like them to discard their database? Delete their mailing list? Cease trying to inform people (particularly gun owners) about threats to the right to keep and bear arms?
Why the distinction? Are you opposed because tax money might be used if it was the government? or do you trust the NRA more than the government?
I read the article. My questions to you remain: Are you opposed to the NRA collecting this data (the OP) at all, or are you opposed to their alleged hypocrisy? Are you alleging hypocrisy on the part of the NRA?
Who registers to attend a gun show? You hand them $10, and you walk in.
The only registration is when someone like Crossroads of the West ASKS for your information so that they can send you junk in the mail.
It is simply stunning how difficult this exercise in simple logic appears to be for some people.
So, Joe gets convicted of a felony, and at that point, I check his name against… the database of criminals?
What would that tell me?
How is this so fucking hard to grasp?
Keeping criminals from having firearms is not worth the cost of a database? Really?
Your logic is too many for me.
As a private actor, the NRA is free to do what it pleases, assuming it breaks no laws.
The government must have a rational reason for what it does, and that reason must relate to some rational government goal.
So I answered as I did. Don’t read my answer and assume that I believe there is no rational reason for the government to build such a database, though. I’m not saying there is or there isn’t. But I’m saying that since the NRA is the one doing it, we can end our inquiry there.
I’m not taking this position - but it does deflate your false dilemma.
I assume you support registration. What would you compromise on to get it?
Nothing needs to be compromised to implement a registry.