Not beyond what the Wikipedia article I cited had to say. But, I'm guessing you are ready with your treatise, including glossy color photographs with a paragraph on the back each one, explaining what each one was.
credible proof needed. most of the few crimes committed with machine guns were by people who stole the weapons from government arsenals or armories.
One of the two Tommy guns used in the St valentine's day massacre was sold to a deputy sheriff. The Wiki article noted that the massacre involved capone gangsters who, are suspected of a significant role as are members of the Chicago Police Department who are said to have had personal revenge as their motive following the killing of a police officer's son.
Since everyone seems to want to dissect the NFA it should be noted that the NRA supported that as well (both '34 and '38.) So, yeah, keep giving the NRA your money while pretending that they're protecting your rights and you'll keep on getting restrictions and bans that they support. Now is the time to pick sides fellas. Either you support the 2nd Amendment or you support the NRA...it can no longer be both. The NRA has been subverted.
that's a bit dishonest since that is like saying either you support civil rights for blacks or you support the Democrat party.
the NRA of 1934 is very different than the one that had to become political when the Democrat party adopted gun control as a fraudulent attempt to stave off Nixon's claims that Democrats were soft on violent crime in the 60s. The Democrat party of the 1930s was racist, full of klansmen and hardly in favor of civil rights for Blacks.
Ahh, I see what you're saying now. That kinda' means that your original reply to me in this thread when you brought up the fact that Democrats supported the NFA was also dishonest then, no? Regardless, I see your point, however, I wasn't saying that you can't support both the 2nd and the NRA at the same time because of the NFA. That was just an aside because everyone is talking about the NFA. I'm saying that you can't support the 2nd and the NRA because the NRA isn't opposing the ban on bump stocks that is in the works RIGHT NOW. 1934 is irrelevant. Sorry if I was unclear on that.
And to address this point. You're correct. The NRA of 1934 is different from the NRA that came later in the 60s and 70s. From my point of view (that of an ardent 2nd Amendment supporter who doesn't blindly adhere to any political parties) the NRA of today is very different from the NRA of just a decade ago. Gun rights are no longer their primary concern. Do you disagree with that? If so, why?
So what you are saying is you don't know the reason why Trump did what he did? Thanks for admitting that truth. Such is rare from Leftists.
In that area, I agree with you. In recent years the NRA has become more about building and sustaining its political influence instead of properly protecting the 2nd Amendment. A couple of times they've even seemed to manipulate situations to block potential game-changing events that could have been the knockout blow against gun control, because they seemed to know if we ever actually get the 2nd Amendment fully protected from infringement then people wouldn't have any motivation to keep sending money to fill the NRA's coffers and the NRA would lose 90% of its political influence and power. I've been a Life Member in the NRA since the mid-90's but any donations I make tend to go to either the GOA or the JPFO.
