See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: ‘Shotgun Sellout’: House Democrats cut special deal with NRA
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.campaignfreedom.org/news ... rats-cut-special-deal-with-nra
Published: Jun 17, 2010
Author: .
Post Date: 2010-06-17 09:23:56 by PSUSA
Ping List: *Shooters* Subscribe to *Shooters*
Keywords: None
Views: 523
Comments: 45
June 14, 2010 House Democrats held a shotgun wedding between campaign finance "reformers" and the National Rifle Association today in announcing a carve out for the powerful gun lobby in a bill responding to the Supreme Court's Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision. Draft amendment affecting the NRA as part of a "Manager's Amendment" for consideration this week in the House Rules Committee: The Center for Competitive Politics is a nonpartisan, nonprofit group dedicated to protecting First Amendment political rights. CCP seeks to deregulate the political marketplace of ideas through research, litigation and advocacy.
NEWSROOM
Press Release
‘Shotgun Sellout’: House Democrats cut special deal with NRA
The "Shotgun Sellout" exempts large organizations from the most burdensome regulations of the DISCLOSE Act, "Democratic Incumbents Seek to Contain Losses by Outlawing Speech in Elections," while pistol whipping genuine grassroots groups.
"The Democratic majority has decided that established, powerful interest groups should be exempted from the proposed draconian regulations, while small advocacy groups should have their voices silenced by the DISCLOSE Act," said Center for Competitive Politics President Sean Parnell. "Exempting the National Rifle Association from these regulations while local groups such as the Oregon Firearms Federation would face stifling regulations if they choose to exercise their First Amendment rights simply cannot be considered ‘reform.'"
"This sort of special carve out for an established interest group is just the kind of insider manipulation that gives the public the sense that Congress is unresponsive to the concerns of ordinary Americans," said Allison Hayward, CCP's Vice President of Policy. "How can it be that invasive and onerous disclosure requirements are proper when applied to small, regional interest groups but not large, wealthy national groups?"
"This exception could serve to entrench political organization, discourage local participation in civic groups, and undermine the civic involvement that Alexis de Tocqueville identified as uniquely American and one of America's great strengths," she added.
According to Capitol Hill sources, the Rules Committee will likely hold a Wednesday hearing to advance the DISCLOSE Act to the House floor by the end of the week.
Exempt section 501(c)(4) organizations" are also exempt from new reporting requirements. These are organizations which have qualified as having tax exempt status under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code for each of the 10 years prior to making a campaign- related disbursement, that had 1 million or more dues-paying members in the prior calendar year, that had members in each of the 50 states, that received no more than 15 percent of their total funding from corporations or labor organizations, and that do not use any corporate or union money to pay for their campaign-related expenditures.
The Center for Competitive Politics has released a two-page overview and a comprehensive, 19-page analysis of the provisions of the DISCLOSE Act. CCP Chairman Bradley A. Smith will speak at policy briefing on the DISCLOSE Act hosted by the Cato Institute Tuesday at 12:30 p.m. in the Capitol Visitor Center.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-5) not displayed.
.
.
.
#6. To: PSUSA (#2)
Too late: the NRA negotiated the Second Amendment in 1934, 1968, and 1986. Not to mention that the NRA was a day late and a dollar short when Alaska recently opted to not require a permit to carry a concealed pistol.
_________________________________________________________________________ I rate the NRA on par with AARP - piss-poor operations.
All of this mumbo jumbo is to keep us and our electoral system tied to money rackets that shouldn't have any influence over it anyway. Corporations and groups shouldn't get an extra big "ventriloquist" voice in addition to all of the individual voices they're comprised of. Lobbying is bribery and should be abolished, punishable with prisontime. Open our airwaves free of charge with equal time for all candidates. Lots of corruption problems solved in a snap.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
YOu nailed it.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Live free or I disagree. As a former lobbyist, I can tell you it depends on what your definition of lobbying is. I was good at what I did and money was never involved.
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." As for the NRA, I've been trying to figure out if they made this Chicago-style deal just to scorch the entire DISCLOSE legislation. If they can make it collapse or stall, they can defeat it that way. Also, if big corporate money starts coming into politics, that may dilute or diminish NRA clout in many political races. Feinstein and other Senate Dims got very riled over the NRA carve-out. It is endangering passage in the Senate. I'm thinking NRA was willing to make the deal, not caring if their inclusion as exempt would doom it. Either way, NRA would see it as win-win. I'm surprised we're not seeing a greater outcry from NRA members. A lot of other RKBA organizations will be hit by this. People like GOA and the stronger state firearms associations. People once boycotted S&W over the deal they cut with Xlinton, hurt them pretty badly. NRA plays it a little too insider for me; I've always like the smaller RKBA groups like GOA better.
Toss in AMA. NRO's Corner explains: AMA gets screwed too, even after eagerly making their little Chicago-style deal with Obama.
Me: Lobbying is bribery and should be abolished, punishable with prisontime. You: I disagree. As a former lobbyist, I can tell you it depends on what your definition of lobbying is. I was good at what I did and money was never involved..... What was involved if not money? We pay for their time and they aren't supposed to be "moonlighting" on the side for any additional "perks". If lobbyists want them to work for their lobby's interests, put them on the lobby's payroll. We'll fire them and hire someone else more ethical to take their place.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
I dont visit firearms boards anymore so I don't know what the deal with that is. But I did post the article written by a nra board member, up above. I've always like the smaller RKBA groups like GOA better. Same here. They are leaner and meaner. I'm thinking NRA was willing to make the deal, not caring if their inclusion as exempt would doom it. Either way, NRA would see it as win-win. I'm thinking that this deal would lock out GOA and the others. I'm thinking that the nra wants a monopoly. I'm thinking that they are on a power grab. I hope that their membership catches on. Most of them are (I hope) loyal to the 2A, not the nra. .
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Live free or Reasoned argument. I lobbied for the Grange which is a true grass roots organization. There is no Grange policy that didn't come from a local Grange first, working its way up through the system. We went and talked to legislators and worked to get our membership involved in the legislative process. Mostly the votes fell the way I wanted because I gave them a valid reason for voting that way and cover if the vote caused them problems during an election. What bothers me about calls to outlaw lobbying is that what you get is not going to be what you wanted. Government regulation is NEVER the answer nor should conservatives call for government regulation. That's what bothers me about conservatives in general. They always say they want government out of their lives, smaller government, less regulation etc then they turn around and call for laws like this. "Lobbying should be illegal". Why? Because some asshole legislator can't resist temptation? No, the real problem was when the Supreme Court gave corporations the same rights as people. We should be working to overturn this judicial ruling not working to take rights away from those who have done nothing wrong.
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." What surprises me is the lack of outcry over this, something actually far worse than McStain-Feingold was. For that, NRA and others oppose him fiercely and have for years. But now, NRA just cuts their own little Chicago deal with Obummer's lackeys and sells out the rest of the Right.
Source From NRA-ILA June 17,2010 We appreciate some NRA members’ concerns about our position on H.R. 5175, the “DISCLOSE Act.” Unfortunately, critics of our position have misstated or misunderstood the facts. We have never said we would support any version of this bill. To the contrary, we clearly stated NRA’s strong opposition to the DISCLOSE Act (as introduced) in a letter sent to Members of Congress on May 26 (click here to read the letter). Through the courts and in Congress, the NRA has consistently and strongly opposed any effort to restrict the rights of our four million members to speak and have their voices heard on behalf of gun owners nationwide. The initial version of H.R. 5175 would effectively have put a gag order on the NRA during elections and threatened our members’ freedom of association, by forcing us to turn our donor lists over to the federal government. We would also have been forced to list our top donors on all election-related television, radio and Internet ads and mailings—even mailings to our own members. We refuse to let this Congress impose those unconstitutional restrictions on our Association. The NRA provides critical firearms training for our Armed Forces and law enforcement throughout the country. This bill would force us to choose between training our men and women in uniform and exercising our right to free political speech. We refuse to let this Congress force us to make that choice. We didn’t “sell out” to Nancy Pelosi or anyone else. We told Congress we opposed the bill. As a result, congressional leaders made a commitment to exempt us from its draconian restrictions on free speech. If that commitment is honored, we will not be involved in the final House debate. If that commitment is not fully honored, we will strongly oppose the bill. Our position is based on principle and experience. During consideration of the previous campaign finance legislation passed in 2002, congressional leadership repeatedly refused to exempt the NRA from its provisions, promising that our concerns would be fixed somewhere down the line. That didn't happen; instead, the NRA had to live under those restrictions for seven years and spend millions of dollars on compliance costs and on legal fees to challenge the law. We will not go down that road again when we have an opportunity to protect our ability to speak. There are those who say the NRA has a greater duty to principle than to gun rights. It’s easy to say we should put the Second Amendment at risk over some so-called First Amendment principle – unless you have a sworn duty to protect the Second Amendment above all else, as we do. The NRA is a bipartisan, single-issue organization made up of millions of individual members dedicated to the protection of the Second Amendment. We do not represent the interests of other organizations. That's their responsibility. Our responsibility is to protect and defend the interests of our members. And that we do without apology.
_________________________________________________________________________ What bothers me about calls to outlaw lobbying is that what you get is not going to be what you wanted. Government regulation is NEVER the answer nor should conservatives call for government regulation. That's what bothers me about conservatives in general. They always say they want government out of their lives, smaller government, less regulation etc then they turn around and call for laws like this. "Lobbying should be illegal". Why? Because some asshole legislator can't resist temptation? Why, yes. That is why, in addition to some other reasons like lobbyists having undue access to all of our Congressional officials and we, the employers they are supposed to be working fulltime for, having our concerns confined to our zoned employees. We pay their paychecks. Pay us by the minute, not more for them, if you want a special interest appointment with them in person as if you're a conglomerate or something. Pay us more by the minute if your company is based out of their state or district. We also should have our own observers at the meeting. Otherwise, make a quick phone call to them, or contact them by mail, or fax them like the rest of us individual folks among their constituency do. No, the real problem was when the Supreme Court gave corporations the same rights as people. We should be working to overturn this judicial ruling That nonesense should never have been crafted and that bizarre abberation is no excuse for corporations to work invasively and traitorously against our Constitutional Republic with their high-falutin' freakshows. not working to take rights away from those who have done nothing wrong. farmfriend, special interests/business interests/outside interests/money interests and so on have been doing so many things so wrong for so long that America can hardly function anymore as our Founder's designed it to for We the People of the Constitution who are their posterity. None of those interests have the right to displace our system with one more to their liking and we don't have to abide any of their subversive connivings as our "law".
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
You really don't understand what I'm talking about do you? Your concept of what a lobbyist is has been warped and you want to punish everyone for the sins of a few. You are right up there with those who want to take guns away from citizens because crooks have them. I spoke for the average citizen, not a corporation. I was paid to do it, that makes me a lobbyist, not something evil. I walked into congressional offices same as you would. Sat down and talked with either the Congress person or their aides same as you would. Only difference is that I spoke for a group and you would be speaking for yourself. Yet you make this out to be something it is not. Like I said, warped. What you are asking for is to deny that group of people from having someone travel to Washington and speak for them. What gives you the right to do that? What part of free speech did you not understand? Special interests? How would you define that? Would you call a Tea Party group a special interest? Should they be denied a voice? Do you think that if you get your way that won't happen? A lobbyist for a corporation doesn't speak for all its members. Same with a union. But that is not the case with the Grange. As I said before policy is set by the membership not the leadership. Yet you would deny them their free speech rights?
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." We have a system to have people travel to Washington and speak for us. They're called Congressmen. Lobbyists interfere with that system and corrupt it.
That nonesense should never have been crafted and that bizarre abberation is no excuse for corporations to work invasively and traitorously against our Constitutional Republic with their high-falutin' freakshows. I'd like to say that acceptance of "any" fraud is the path to destruction whether it's fraudulent money, fraudulent creation of "entities, or any of those things we call "LEGAL FICTIONS". Things belong to their creator to do with as that creator chooses. If a thing [PERSON as LEGALLY DEFINED] is created by legal fiction by the government it belongs to the government completely, and all of its rights or privileges are subject to the creator's rule. Those things created by GOD ALMIGHTY are subject to God's law ... not man's law. This post isn't aimed at religiously converting anyone it's about law. Creator's have authority over their creation. So, when you see the FEDERAL (reserve bank) GOVT issuing law, the law ONLY PERTAINS TO THEIR CREATIONS, ie., the name on the DRIVER LICENSE or SOCIAL SECURITY CARD.
YOU only count when it's census or TAX time" ... don't you find it ironic that the census bureau says they rely upon the Constitution for their authority and pays their help in UNCONSTITUTIONAL FRNs ... bend over and lick the hand that beats you !
Oh, plz. Maybe you were some exception to the usual corporate lobbyists but if you have an answer to that aggregious problem besides tolerate it for the sake of your lobby's higher standard of ethics, I haven't seen it yet. Even if you were more people oriented than them, you were still apparently oriented to the people you were being paid to represent. Our officials are already being paid to represent us all Constitutionally as it is (even though most don't seem to think that's their job) and lobbyists are getting more of their attention than others -- on our "dime" -- individually and in their various group formations too. I'm not denying anyone "a" voice. It's the many extra voices in artificial forms -- yes, even a teacup -- that are special interests and are speaking over and above others who are being tuned out because of the big noisemakers. What gives you lobbyists the right to do that and act like its ok, no big deal? Not the Constitution. Representation is apportioned per population, not per population + everyone's various businesses/hobbies/etc., etc. affiliations. A business owner can speak to their Congressperson themselves as a citizen. If they're too lazy or whatever to do that, why should you be allowed to use your voice + their voice, and anyone else's they want to lump into the soundmixer -- in addition to all of those collected voices being free to speak up for themselves again and again on an individual basis as much as they want to. No one has a right to expect to have access to our officials for pushing UnConstitutional garbage, either, which shouldn't even be cluttering up our system and wasting their worktime that we are paying for. Pay us for the use of their time and pay fines too for any stepping out of the bounds with UnConstitutional propositions to subvert our rightful government.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Lobbyists interfere with that system and corrupt it. lol Applause! :)
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
I'll get back to you on this later today if possible.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
And there you go. Straight from the horses asses. How benevolent of congress to do that. Now the NRA will have a monopoly. They got theirs, fuck everyone else. We will not go down that road again when we have an opportunity to protect our ability to speak. And everyone elses ability to speak? What about them? You did sell out. Fuck the NRA. In closing, look at that final paragraph The NRA is a bipartisan, single-issue organization made up of millions of individual members dedicated to the protection of the Second Amendment. We do not represent the interests of other organizations. That's their responsibility. Our responsibility is to protect and defend the interests of our members. And that we do without apology. They claim to protect the 2A, in the 1st sentence. Then they claim "Our responsibility is to protect and defend the interests of our members. " So which is it you traitors? Is it the 2A or the interests of your members? Do you believe this bullshit??? .
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Live free or They sold out years and years ago !
YOU only count when it's census or TAX time" ... don't you find it ironic that the census bureau says they rely upon the Constitution for their authority and pays their help in UNCONSTITUTIONAL FRNs ... bend over and lick the hand that beats you !
Yep. I had to hold my nose when I sent my app in. I didn't want to do it. But I needed a place to shoot and had no real choice. It will be interesting to see how this plays out with their members. Who are they loyal to; the Constitution and all citizens or the nra? If I can see thru the BS in that letter, I'm sure that they can too. .
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Live free or They probably report who shoots, what they shoot and how often they shoot.
YOU only count when it's census or TAX time" ... don't you find it ironic that the census bureau says they rely upon the Constitution for their authority and pays their help in UNCONSTITUTIONAL FRNs ... bend over and lick the hand that beats you !
Things belong to their creator to do with as that creator chooses. If a thing [PERSON as LEGALLY DEFINED] is created by legal fiction by the government it belongs to the government completely, and all of its rights or privileges are subject to the creator's rule. Those things created by GOD ALMIGHTY are subject to God's law ... not man's law. This post isn't aimed at religiously converting anyone it's about law. Creator's have authority over their creation. So, when you see the FEDERAL (reserve bank) GOVT issuing law, the law ONLY PERTAINS TO THEIR CREATIONS, ie., the name on the DRIVER LICENSE or SOCIAL SECURITY CARD. I'm late getting back to you on this. About legal fictions: Constitutional Peasant Dialogue Replacement
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
When the so called "assault weapons and magazine ban" was pending they got Bill Ruger to go along by exempting his Mini-14 which as everyone knows is as deadly as any of the other firearms that were not excluded. Bill Ruger then convinced SAAMI - The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute to go along and the bill passed. It isn't necessary to take on millions of armed Americans when depriving them of their birthright. It's only necessary to win over an influential profiteer in the industry and he'll neutralize the lobbyists who could stop the bad bills cold. Sadly, there are too many NRA members who won't oppose this bill because the NRA has sold them out. And, the NRA will crow about their "victory", even though they would be helping the enemy convert absolute freedom into "carefully crafted exceptions for the politically influential". According the The GOA Congratulations are in order and the DISCLOSE Act is on the ropes. (no thanx to the ancillary GOP handmaiden, the NRA)
I love that clip from Python!
Feinstein and other Senate Dims got very riled over the NRA carve-out. It is endangering passage in the Senate. I'm thinking NRA was willing to make the deal, not caring if their inclusion as exempt would doom it. Either way, NRA would see it as win-win. With this "carve out" it is very likely the legislation, if passed, cannot withstand an "equal protection" challenge. It stinks to high heaven. Gun Owner's of America is the only 2nd Amendment Defense organization worthy of our support (And OFF - The Oregon Firearms Association. Kevin Starret who runs OFF is also GOA's Legislative Manager for Oregon - and a friend, but that's beside the point - NO COMPROMISE NO PRISONERS). The NRA are not merely pussies but co-dependent quislings.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
You'd think after the stink among the RKBA folk over McStain and his Stain-Feingold law that the NRA would steer clear of making deals on free speech in elections. I never disliked NRA before but after this episode, I'm taking a harder look at everything they do. I'll stick with GOA. They never back down or compromise and yet they are almost as effective politically as NRA. NRA has adopted a habit of making too many political deals with the gooberment. It can't be good.
I gave up on the NRA years ago. I do not trust them to not sell us out. They are too "buddy-buddy" with the political insiders. They don't want to "offend" their "friends" by playing hardball. They are hopelessly compromised.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
I'm glad to hear that. :)
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Too freaking funny ....
YOU only count when it's census or TAX time" ... don't you find it ironic that the census bureau says they rely upon the Constitution for their authority and pays their help in UNCONSTITUTIONAL FRNs ... bend over and lick the hand that beats you !
Hahahahaha... that's pretty funny :-)
What he said !!!
YOU only count when it's census or TAX time" ... don't you find it ironic that the census bureau says they rely upon the Constitution for their authority and pays their help in UNCONSTITUTIONAL FRNs ... bend over and lick the hand that beats you !
Bill Ruger then convinced SAAMI - The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute to go along and the bill passed. I'll take your word for that. If I'd have known that, I wouldn't have bought my 22/45 or my Mk2. Both great handguns but there are other great ones out there. But I'd be interested in knowing how this traitor got SAAMI to go along with it. He's just one person. They could have told him to pound sand. .
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Live free or But I'd be interested in knowing how this traitor got SAAMI to go along with it. He's just one person. They could have told him to pound sand. Wow, I'd love to have a 22/45. (I wouldn't have boycotted S&W, either. I love their revolvers too much) And, keep in mind that SAAMI are first and foremost vendors who provide much of the loot used to bribe congress, and the last thing they want is a war with govt. They want to sell stuff, (like Elmer Fudd Double Barreled Commemorative Model Wabbit guns, tweed shooting jackets, shotgun reloaders and impact resistant shooting glasses) most of which is unaffected by the ban. I've also seen a great deal of apathy and "2nd amendment fatigue" with gun dealers who don't care if a whole class of ugly black plastic-stocked self loading firearms are banned. They'll sell what is left and make munny, and that's what it's all about for most. Most gun stores in my state already stock nothing but "Fudd guns". If someone trades an AR15 (from any manufacturer) or a Mini 30 the store staff scoops them up. If not they're gone in a day, and there's nothing but 50's vintage Parker Hale bolt action .30-06 rifles, or, Remington, Winchester, Savage, Mark X, etc., and other high production items that people bought then dumped.
:) Here's lookin' at you, HOUNDDAWG, and your post about Elmer Fudd, Model Wabbits, and SAAMI: ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
It's Sam!
Yepper. That be him, alright. Lookin' fer Mr. Fudd and Wabbits, I areckon. :)
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
That is not what it is like in the IL area. There are 2 main gun stores in my area. There are more ARs in them than you can shake a stick at. I talked to one owner and was told that they sell at least 10 per week. That is a lot of ARs out there, just from that one store. The other owner can go screw himself. There's nothing like blowing 3K + in cash and not even getting a "fuck you very much". That is Ron and Jo's in O'Fallon IL. If those in your area are in it for the money, why won't they sell them? That 22/45, right out of the box, is more accurate than I am. Once I found the right ammo, that is. Taking it down can be a PITA though, until you get the hang of it.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Live free or We had one store that catered to the simulated machine guns and fatigues crowd. One night the owner's girl friend decided to relieve herself by some bushes outside some club and when Five-0 rolled up she pointed to her boyfriend waiting in his truck, and the subsequent search revealed crack, pipes and assorted paraphernalia. He was forced to sell his store and the govt seized his firearms, a quarter mil worth. They piled on the federal charges and it ruined him. The irony is, all she had to do was say that she was alone since she wasn't holding anything but she decided to involve him in her "peeing outside" bust, and her "suspicious behavior" was enough to search the vehicle. I'm assuming that he's since found a new girl friend. The two brothers who own the Fudd gun store used to sell sell Tec-9s and the occasional AR, but they prefer to wrap most of their money up in expensive shotguns, hand guns and accessories. The owner told me he sold multiple Tec-9s to a known NY gun runner, and he reported the multiple sales each time as required. The ATF told him to "keep selling them", I believe because Clinton was trying to prove that other states were the source of NY City's "gun problem". I asked why he didn't just stop selling the damned things (with coarse triggers and iron sights best suited for drive by shootings) and he said that he wants to make money. He wasn't concerned that he was helping an anti gun admin build the case for grabbing a whole class of firearms that the govt most fears. One brother is a hunter who likes to poach ducks, the other likes to compete in shotgun competitions. Their mother was a champion shotgunner in her day. Presumably, this is why their store is geared to sporting arms rather than militia weapons.
...First Amendment protections are subject to negotiation. The Second Amendment surely cannot be far behind.
Obama is the miscegenated bastard of a white communist whore. True story.
-Schweizerische Schuetzenzeitung (Swiss Shooting Federation) April, 1941
#7. To: PSUSA, 4 (#3)
#8. To: PSUSA (#0)
#9. To: TooConservative (#5)
CHIMPOUT!
die kill ~~ Me
God is a separatist. That's good enough for me.
#10. To: GreyLmist, PSUSA, Lod, Original_Intent, wudidiz, abraxas (#8)
Lobbying is bribery and should be abolished, punishable with prisontime.
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#11. To: PSUSA (#9)
#12. To: Lod (#7)
I rate the NRA on par with AARP - piss-poor operations.
"In fact, this is precisely what is happening now. Senate Democrats would love to make good on their promise to the AMA to pass the doc fix in exchange for the AMA's support for Obamacare, but they can't find the offsets, and thus don't have the votes."
#13. To: farmfriend (#10)
#14. To: TooConservative (#11)
I'm surprised we're not seeing a greater outcry from NRA members
CHIMPOUT!
die kill ~~ Me
God is a separatist. That's good enough for me.
#15. To: GreyLmist, PSUSA, Lod, Original_Intent, wudidiz, abraxas (#13)
What was involved if not money?
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#16. To: PSUSA (#14)
#17. To: PSUSA, *Shooters* (#0)
Obama is the miscegenated bastard of a white communist whore. True story.
-Schweizerische Schuetzenzeitung (Swiss Shooting Federation) April, 1941
#18. To: farmfriend (#15)
#19. To: GreyLmist, *Constitution Party*, *libertarians* (#18)
Why, yes. That is why, in addition to some other reasons like lobbyists having undue access to all of our Congressional officials and we, the employers they are supposed to be working fulltime for, having our concerns confined to our zoned employees. We pay their paychecks. Pay us by the minute, not more for them, if you want a special interest appointment with them in person as if you're a conglomerate or something. Pay us more by the minute if your company is based out of their state or district. We also should have our own observers at the meeting. Otherwise, make a quick phone call to them, or contact them by mail, or fax them like the rest of us individual folks among their constituency do.
farmfriend, special interests/business interests/outside interests/money interests and so on have been doing so many things so wrong for so long that America can hardly function anymore as our Founder's designed it to for We the People of the Constitution who are their posterity. None of those interests have the right to displace our system with one more to their liking and we don't have to abide any of their subversive connivings as our "law".
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#20. To: farmfriend (#19)
What you are asking for is to deny that group of people from having someone travel to Washington and speak for them. What gives you the right to do that? What part of free speech did you not understand?
#21. To: GreyLmist, farmfriend (#18)
No, the real problem was when the Supreme Court gave corporations the same rights as people. We should be working to overturn this judicial ruling
#22. To: farmfriend (#19)
(Edited)
#23. To: TooConservative (#20)
We have a system to have people travel to Washington and speak for us. They're called Congressmen.
#24. To: noone222 (#21)
#25. To: X-15, all, WTF is this shit??? (#17)
We didn’t “sell out” to Nancy Pelosi or anyone else. We told Congress we opposed the bill. As a result, congressional leaders made a commitment to exempt us from its draconian restrictions on free speech. If that commitment is honored, we will not be involved in the final House debate. If that commitment is not fully honored, we will strongly oppose the bill.
CHIMPOUT!
die kill ~~ Me
God is a separatist. That's good enough for me.
#26. To: PSUSA (#25)
Fuck the NRA.
#27. To: noone222 (#26)
They sold out years and years ago !
CHIMPOUT!
die kill ~~ Me
God is a separatist. That's good enough for me.
#28. To: PSUSA (#27)
It will be interesting to see how this plays out with their members. Who are they loyal to; the Constitution and all citizens or the nra?
#29. To: noone222 (#21)
(Edited)
I'd like to say that acceptance of "any" fraud is the path to destruction whether it's fraudulent money, fraudulent creation of "entities, or any of those things we call "LEGAL FICTIONS".
#30. To: PSUSA (#2)
#31. To: GreyLmist (#29)
#32. To: TooConservative (#11)
As for the NRA, I've been trying to figure out if they made this Chicago-style deal just to scorch the entire DISCLOSE legislation. If they can make it collapse or stall, they can defeat it that way. Also, if big corporate money starts coming into politics, that may dilute or diminish NRA clout in many political races.
#33. To: Original_Intent (#32)
(Edited)
With this "carve out" it is very likely the legislation, if passed, cannot withstand an "equal protection" challenge. It stinks to high heaven.
#34. To: TooConservative (#33)
#35. To: HOUNDDAWG (#31)
I love that clip from Python!
#36. To: GreyLmist (#29)
#37. To: GreyLmist (#29)
“It has been said, 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens, but it is never gone.” ~ Rose F. Kennedy
#38. To: Original_Intent (#32)
Gun Owner's of America is the only 2nd Amendment Defense organization worthy of our support (And OFF - The Oregon Firearms Association. Kevin Starret who runs OFF is also GOA's Legislative Manager for Oregon - and a friend, but that's beside the point - NO COMPROMISE NO PRISONERS). The NRA are not merely pussies but co-dependent quislings.
#39. To: HOUNDDAWG (#30)
When the so called "assault weapons and magazine ban" was pending they got Bill Ruger to go along by exempting his Mini-14 which as everyone knows is as deadly as any of the other firearms that were not excluded.
CHIMPOUT!
die kill ~~ Me
God is a separatist. That's good enough for me.
#40. To: PSUSA (#39)
If I'd have known that, I wouldn't have bought my 22/45 or my Mk2. Both great handguns but there are other great ones out there.
#41. To: noone222, wudidiz, HOUNDDAWG (#36)
#42. To: GreyLmist (#41)
#43. To: HOUNDDAWG (#42)
It's Sam!
#44. To: HOUNDDAWG (#40)
If someone trades an AR15 (from any manufacturer) or a Mini 30 the store staff scoops them up.
CHIMPOUT!
die kill ~~ Me
God is a separatist. That's good enough for me.
#45. To: PSUSA (#44)
If those in your area are in it for the money, why won't they sell them?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest