The NRA playbook - how to sell a massacre

Don’t forget that they have a shitty health service

 

you'd be wrong. very wrong.

 

Without the US, you’d be speaking Chinese. Japanese if we hadn’t entered WWII. There is no balance of benefits between the two countries. Not even close. The US could far more easily survive a divorce than could AU.
As for what it has to do with guns; our second Amendment is a reflection of a history of a philosophy of individual rights and liberty, a government that serves the people (not subjects) and of a history individuals valuing self reliance, self determination, and a sense of helping others achieve and preserve the same.
As for lecturing Australia, I could care less other than responding to Australians with no understanding of the US trying to lecture those in the US on gun control.

 

The view of Australians, and of many countries are skewed, by a couple significant factors. Most of the information they get from the US is based on US’s main stream media sources which are highly partisan and from their media which uses and spins both in criticism of the US but also to support/justify their domestic social controls, collective philosophies, and centrist mode of governance.
If they think the mainstream media here is a reflection of American values, they are as clueless as the MM was/is in predicting Trump’s demise.

 

While I do not have hard evidence to back up my statements, I do believe a lot of the lecturing we are receiving is nothing more than parroting what these folks have been unknowingly been programmed to believe by their media, which gets it's information from our media... a media which has been rated over and over again, by their own polling, as being untrustworthy and biased.

I say that based on the fact a lot of what is posted it is a repetition, of the same old, same old, which many times is a word for word copy and past off of various anti-gun groups web pages, in other words these folks are not posting their own well researched thoughts, instead what they are posting is the information they have been spoon fed to believe, bits of information which are bright very workable ideas, from reputable, knowledgeable and unbiased sources of gun related information, while nothing could be further from the actual truth.

Another clue is their immediate attacks on the NRA, an organization they also fail to independently research the current and past history of, clues to this are references to the NRA as the gun manufacturers lobby, which they are not or it's mind control ability to program their members to toe the NRA line, which they don't.

They also don't seem to realize when they attack the NRA they are actually attacking law abiding gun owners many who are not members of the NRA and with each post they erode more and more of what little credibility they ever had.

But the real clue is when the enter or start a thread in a manner similar to entering a bar they have never visited and loudly announcing that every one in the room is nothing more than a gun toting, low information redneck ****** and they are here to educate us and set our lives back on the right track if we just follow their fatherly advice.

And then they wonder why they get no respect, just attacks on their false narratives.

 

Very true and it seems too many of them are too lazy to fact check what they have been programmed to regurgitate and sadly like many Americans they don't even realize they are being brainwashed, this is exemplified by their rather apparent lack of any independent thoughts in reference to the subject being debated.

 

You're kidding right?

 

To you didn't that comment sound like an biased Obama era attack on law enforcement?

Great way to blow up ones credibility right from the beginning.

 

You are exactly correct. Millions of guns out there and millions of legal firearms owners. Yet the violent left wants them disarmed in favor the their armed and violent brethren.

 

That parallels how the left could give a rats fanny about the victim of a violent crime(*) but will bend over backwards worrying about the rights of the criminal who committed the crime.

* That is unless they can use the dead body(s) as a soapbox to further their anti-gun narrative.

 

My point was that a determined killer will find a way to kill with or without a firearm so additional gun laws will accomplish nothing.

 

Quite true.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...e-of-why-gun-control-laws-do-not-work.553751/

 

They aren't needed on a daily basis. I know I don't need mine on a daily basis... but then I don't know WHEN I might need it, seeing as how criminals don't make appointments. I haven't been in a gunfight every day of my life, but just once was enough to let me know I'd rather have a gun and not need it than need it and not have it.

 

False. If the bad guy has a knife, or a club, or any improvised weapon, then regardless of your size or strength you are better served by shooting the bastard.

 

Do tell us about your "OK Corrall" moment!

 

Not in Australia

Your response HAS to be in proportion to the perceived threat

 

Well, here, I'd have no choice. It would be "Do whatever I could with whatever I could get my hands on."

 

Correct.

 

I dont get in a car accident and need my seatbelt on a daily basis. does that mean I dont need one ever?

 

I'm glad here in the U.S. we don't have to put up with silly crap like that.

 

Hey I have never had a fire in my home, but I still have three 20 pound ABC extinguishers in the home, it's much better to have, then to want.

 

In the united states, a knife qualifies as a deadly weapon. Anything brandished in a manner that may cause one to be concerned for their own life or safety can qualify as being a deadly weapon in the context of the situation. As such, the use of deadly force in response to being threatened with a deadly weapon is in direct proportion to the perceived threat.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/930

(2) The term “dangerous weapon” means a weapon, device, instrument, material, or substance, animate or inanimate, that is used for, or is readily capable of, causing death or serious bodily injury, except that such term does not include a pocket knife with a blade of less than 2½ inches in length.

 

Ahhhhhhh! “Naturalnews” the Gatewaypundit for the alternative therapy conspiracy crowd. Did you actually LOOK at those figures? The majority of deaths were OUTPATIENTS

 

I love how, when the right in America run out of argument they drag in WWII. you DO realise don’t you that Australia has assisted YOU in theatres of war more often than you have assisted US

 

That's because Australia never enters into a war unless it is to be a partner of a super power like the U.S.