Stop blaming the NRA for failed gun control efforts

I referred to the obvious. The NRA are a pressure group 'buying' politicians, thus making the comment "N.R.A. does not promote anything but safe and proper use of firearms by sane law abiding citizens" ridiculous. I don't expect you to accept the obvious.

 

Nope, that's not true. They aren't a "pressure group 'buying' politicians". They're a civil rights group working with politicians to protect a Constitutional right they promote citizens having safe and proper use of. That's not "ridiculous", it's just a fact... and one that's plenty OBVIOUS if you're willing to look at it honestly.

 

So they give individual politicians millions of dollars out of charity? That's a little naive, isn't it?

 

The NRA's contributions are out of doing the work they need to do to protect the Constitution. Again, there are a lot of civil rights groups that give individual politicians "millions of dollars"; most of them "millions of dollars" MORE than the NRA. But you're okay with that so long as they're representing the right things, aren't you? It's just them thar eeeevil NRA'ers that got your knickers in a twist now, ain't it?

 

I don't care how you want to justify the corruption of your political system. It doesn't interest me. But surely, even a support of the NRA, can realise the stupidity of the "N.R.A. does not promote anything but safe and proper use of firearms by sane law abiding citizens" comment?

 

I don't "justify" the corruption. That corruption pisses me off. But short of taking up arms and declaring war on the sources of the corruption there isn't a lot to be done about it at this point until the American people are ready to take it on.

There is no "stupidity" to the comment. It's is 100% factual. Deal with it. You can sit here and try twisting semantics and what the meaning of the world "is" is, but I'm completely and utterly not interested.

 

First, supporting a politician with a political contribution because they agree with pro gun positions isn’t ‘buying’ anything. If so, then all political contributions would be considered such.
Second, in the sense of ‘buying’ show a single instance where NRA support resulted in any politician changing from anti gun to pro gun.
To say the NRA ‘buys’ politicians is a product of a mischaracterization that is a deliberate attempt at demonization what the NRA is and who it represents by those that have no understanding of what the NRA is.
Not unlike, to give a closer to home analogy, when someone uses the acronym, IRA. Few Americans know what the NRA is, swallow the bilge out of ignorance and have never heard of the UVF, UFF, Red Hand, RHC, RHD, SDA and more. A Brit arguing about the NRA, is about as entertaining as an American arhuing the alphabet soup in NI. But, then too, I haven’t meant many Brits that can explain what the NRA is and regarding that, when asked, when a single question is not asked, it’s a major clue they have no idea what they are talking about.

 

You've essentially just agreed with what I said, which was contempt at the "N.R.A. does not promote anything but safe and proper use of firearms by sane law abiding citizens" lie

 

That your reading comprehension is so lacking isn't my problem.

 

Can you read? Here goes: "does not promote anything but..". Its not difficult to comprehend and also dismiss.

 

"Less than two months after a 19-year-old gunman shot dead 14 students and three faculty members at a Broward County high school, city and county officials in parts of Florida are pushing back against a state firearm law they say has created a chilling effect on their ability to respond to constituents’ demands.

"Challenges to the 2011 'preemption' law, which bans local governments from imposing gun restrictions tougher than those in state laws, are just one of the ways local officials are fighting for stricter regulations in the wake of the Feb. 14 massacre at Douglas High School">Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland."
https://www.news4jax.com/news/cities-counties-take-aim-at-state-gun-law

The NRA fully deserves to be blamed. They've supported such state laws which automatically invalidate any local gun laws. They stand in the way of communities protecting themselves. They stand in the way of lives being saved.

 

If the NRA truly brought politicians, there would be no firearm-related restrictions enacted.

 

The aforementioned push back has been observed for years long before the Parkland incident ever took place. It is nothing new, and does not represent anything.

Beyond such, local laws that exist on a city level are devoid of any legitimate basis for existing, as they cannot be enforced when the rest of the state will not follow suit. Such is why the firearm-related restrictions in the city of Chicago serve no purpose, as the state of Illinois does not use them as well.

 

I love the idea that they give millions to individual politicians purely out of the goodness of their hearts. Brings a tear to my eye so it does!

 

Cease and desist with being deliberately and intentionally dense on the issue.

 

You're the one pretending that millions are simply gifted to politicians. Do you also believe in the tooth fairy?

 

It is yourself that is convinced beyond all reasonable doubt that the politicians who receive these donations, would never have demonstrated the same political record if funding had never entered the equation.

Based on the statements being presented by yourself, it is plainly obvious that the belief held on the part of yourself is that a politician is simply incapable of supporting ideologies that the NRA agrees with unless they are first bribed into believing such to be the case.

 

This is a long winded way of just saying that you think the NRA just gift millions to politicians for no apparent reason.

Will I now get an essay on why the tooth fairy does indeed exist?

 

Meaning it is believed on the part of yourself, that no politician would ever support firearm-related freedoms unless the NRA is paying them to do such.

Off topic and irrelevant nonsense.

 

Actually it is very much on topic. The idea that the NRA gift millions for no return is as realistic as the existence of a tooth fairy.

 

Got it. I guess the Eddie the Eagle program is nothing more than AR 15 advertising for 8 year olds.

 

If that is what it actually was would you have a problem with it or would you just ignore it?

 

But it's not. Next.

 

Facts prove otherwise!

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-helmke/nras-eddie-eagle-doesnt-f_b_572285.html