Has the last 6 months changed your opinion of the NRA?

The answer to your question is, of course: "Too damn long!"

If our collective gaggle of Criminal Empowerment Advocates have their way, the first responder is likely to be a social worker so we can have a nice, long chat about the innumerable ways in which the 3 thugs have experienced painful disenfranchisement and systemic racism all of which is the fault of the wicked, evil and greedy white devil oppressor.

That's why I don't walk around town at night without my own .45 caliber "very first responder".

 

The answers are:
Location: Yours
Distance: 0
Time of arrival: 0
YOU are the first responder.

 

That's essentially what I meant.
I can think of at least 3 times in which I have been my own "first responder"

 

Are you saying we need a return of abolition? Society is willing to tolerate 10k killed by drunk drivers and those killed by alcoholism in order to have a drinky. I don't think society should tolerate the carnage from handguns, as in the inner city that the right keeps pointing at, so boys can have their toys and pretend it's for self protection.

 

NRA is waaaay too political and take foreign money that they then donate to US campaigns, which makes them criminals

 

If you are saying we need to repeal the Second Amendment then yes, I am suggesting we return to Prohibition. If you want to save lives it only seems reasonable. All gun deaths combine (murder, suicide and accident) are less than half the number of deaths attributed to alcohol. It seems society is also willing to tolerate 14,542 murders in order to have a little shooty.

With an estimated 393,000,000 guns in the U.S., approximately 43% of the population lives in a household with a gun. I'm not sure how successful an attempt to repeal the Second Amendment would be.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/22/facts-about-guns-in-united-states/
https://news.gallup.com/poll/264932/percentage-americans-own-guns.aspx

Nothing wrong with toys especially if they double for self defense. By the way, guns for protection are not just for "boys". My wife carries an gun, so does my sister. My mother and grandmother also kept guns for protection.

 

I am a member of the NRA and I am not a criminal. I have never taken foreign money. Are you suggesting that all 5,000,000 NRA members are criminals?

 

I've been a member of the NRA, off and on for most of my life. I've always seen it as a refuge and defense of the the American tradition of firearm ownership, hunting and the broad variety of shooting sports. Their greatest benefit or service to Americans is in the legal realm, defending the second amendment.

 

Your opinion doesn't matter.

 

I think society is happy with the cost benefit ratio as far as the legalization of alcohol goes. Laws are restrictive enough for most people's satisfaction and everyone is aware what alcohol does to the body and treatment centers are available.

People, however, are not happy about the gun problem and much more can be done to alleviate the problem but there is one thing obstructing that. 2 A.

BTW your wife is statistically more likely to have her gun used on herself, child, acquaintance, spouse or by accident than in self defense.

 

no just the top brass who accepted foreign money and then funneled it towards US campaign contributions.

 

I find it fascinating that you "think society is happy with the cost benefit ratio as far as the legalization of alcohol goes" and yet "are not happy about the gun problem". That, to me, also indicates that you think society is comfortable with 80,000+ alcohol related deaths but uncomfortable with 40,000 gun related deaths. This then appears to me that you are more interested in taking guns away from law abiding citizens then you are in saving human lives.

I agree that some statistics do indicate a danger to women having firearms in the home. I would suggest the reason for this is ignorance and lack of training. My wife won't be one to contribute to those stats. She is well versed in use and handling of firearms (rifle, pistol, shotgun). She carries her 9mm when outside the home and it is always close at hand when at home. She knows where it is and how to use it. She has been shooting for more than 30 years. I for more than 50.

 

More people killed by DUIs than by the misuse of firearms. Maybe society is happy giving up a measure of safety for Liberty when it comes to owning a firearm. Since there is no reportable data on how many crimes are averted because a citizen was carrying a firearm, it is pure speculation for anyone to make the claim that you're more likely to be killed by their own gun than a bad guy out to do them harm. A few weeks ago I had to make that decision myself. It was reported, the cops came out, and found my actions justified. There were no data consultants that gathered any facts regarding that incident since nobody ended up injured or dead.

 

I like how people compare gun deaths to motor vehicle deaths.

Most motor vehicle deaths are accidents...... Not so much with gun deaths.

Most cars were not designed to be deadly weapons. Guns were.

The comparison is illogical and absurd

 

I would be just as mad at a drunk driver for killing a family member as I would be if an assassin did it with the latest hi tech weapon with all the gizmos attached. Both are preventable AND I can't find a booze in the Constitution - and it wasn't like the founders didn't like to drink.

 

I don't know any viable social movement to restrict the consumption of alcohol so I don't know why you find that "fascinating". There are groups, and there ought to be, that alert the public to the dangers of alcohol and make sure laws are enforced like Mothers Against Drunk Drivers.

There is a movement against and concern over gun violence. It's seen as a problem that needs to be fixed. Inner city gun violence is out of control, something right-wingers like to point at and snicker, but things could be done about it if it weren't for the right and 2 A.

Good for you wife. I hope no mistakes or accidents happen and she doesn't get too pissed at you.

 

The "gun problem" You've been watching too much MSDNC..

According to the rabidly anti-gun VPC, 2014-2016, each year, 100,000 guns were used in self-defense.
https://vpc.org/studies/justifiable20.pdf
That's 10.3x more often that to commit murder (9,698/yr) across the same time period
That's 4.5x more often that to commit suicide (22,108/yr) across the same time period.

How does this demonstrate a "gun problem"?

Unsupportable nonsense.

 

Yes. Supported by those whose emotions were preyed upon by the (D)ishonest.
Such as yourself.

 

I didn't see that comparison in this thread anywhere.

I would agree with your assessment. Interesting to note that while most motor vehicle deaths are accidents most gun deaths are self-inflicted.

Many motor vehicle accidents are preventable; especially those caused by drunk drivers.

Whether talking deaths from vehicle accidents, drunk drivers, firearms murders, suicide with a gun, from alcohol abuse or smoking they are still loss of human life. If the goal is to save lives lets start where it will save the greatest number and where it does not involve Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms.

 

We have this "debate" on a regular basis. The real issue is that we could prevent a lot of firearms deaths. I cannot stress this enough. The controlling word here is prevent. Prevention and control are different concepts. We can prevent deaths by firearms without gun control. The problem with instituting it, however, is that the NRA and the gun lobby in general tend to be reactionaries, not activists. They tell me my bills have no chance of passage. Maybe not. But, if they were interjected every time the left demanded more gun control, the left would give up rather than to address the prevention aspect because anti-gunners are committed to control.

 

What I find fascinating is that you "think society is happy with the cost benefit ratio as far as... ...alcohol goes" but "are not happy about the gun problem". That indicates to me you believe the people are happy with the money made from alcohol sales, happy with their right to consume alcohol and don't care if it costs 88,000+ lives and millions of dollars annually. Sounds like the alcohol producers are successfully pushing their products on the American people.

I would agree there are concerns over gun violence and that it is a problem that needs to be fixed. I support fixing it. I would guess the majority of gun owners feel the same. It is a problem that can be fixed without repeal of the Second Amendment. The problem is violence not guns. I live in a part of the U.S. where there is higher than 50% gun ownership and we don't have the "out of control" gun violence that exists in the inner cities of America. People are not violent because they have guns; guns don't create violence.

You do realize, in homes with alcohol, it is statistically more likely that there will be spouse abuse, child abuse, "accidents" and murders?

"Good for you wife. I hope... ...and she doesn't get too pissed at you." It sounds like you are suggesting that if my wife gets mad at me that she might shoot me. You do realize how silly that argument is? A person who would shoot someone because they were mad is just as likely to stab them or hit them over the head with a blunt object if there is no gun available. It is a self control issue not a gun issue. Again, it is not about the gun, it's about the violent person.

If you believe guns have a greater negative effect on America than alcohol then I believe you are mistaken.

 

that is false.

i think its half

 

NRA opposes expanded background checks, which is insane.

no one should be able to guy a gun without a background check.

how else can we know if they are a convicted felon or fugitive from justice?

or mentally deranged?

 

I am unaware there is a ground swell to restrict the consumption of alcohol or tighten laws regulating alcohol (in fact my state loosened them with Sunday sales to the applause of many). So that point is moot....apples and oranges.

What the right goes on about is inner city violence (Fox likes to publish Chicago's weekend body count every Monday) and their suggestion to stop it is more police, who usually only get there to clean up the mess.

As you point out, in order to stop gun violence you need a violent person but you also need a gun. Everyone has a potential for violence, so it seems nothing can be done about human nature, unless you are into selective breeding. The other factor is guns, which you conveniently left out. A gun is a tool designed to kill. It is the most effective and efficient means to kill. I can hear you say, well they could use a knife. I can out run a knife but not a bullet. So guns are what can be controlled to solve the problem. Look at the rest of the developed world. Do they have our problem? We have 5% of the world's population and 42% of the guns...crazy.

 

This is why our right to own and use them is specifically protected by the Constitution.