Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

NRA's Official Recommendation - MOAR GUNZ!111


  • Please log in to reply
105 replies to this topic

#31 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,711
  • Reputation: 2,351
Moderators

Posted 21 December 2012 - 03:29 PM

The answer is not going to be an easy one for sure. It's going to take a joint effort by a lot of parties. What bothers me is the fact that the NRA is shirking any and all responsibility and deflecting all of the blame.

Time for them to man up. If they don't, they're going to endure a pretty massive backlash that will be a witch hunt.

#32 NanceUSMC

NanceUSMC

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 29-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,155
  • Reputation: 513
HUDDLER

Posted 21 December 2012 - 03:30 PM

To be honest, I like the idea. I don't give a poo about the tax aspect. I think it would help with school shootings. The high school I went to got a resident cop the year after Columbine. I was gone by then but I never heard of any problems.

Would prefer they have tazers, though, rather than guns.


Taser won't help if some nut shows up with a rifle and two pistols, though... I don't want to have to get within 14-21 feet of him to stop him...

In reality, they likely carry both... Our office did in many cases...

#33 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,711
  • Reputation: 2,351
Moderators

Posted 21 December 2012 - 03:34 PM

Also, it's a bit ironic one of the major selling points of the NRA and gun activists is to prevent tyranny, yet here they are advocating an increase in armed government agents in civilian places.

Bit fishy.

#34 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 16,820
  • Reputation: 4,802
HUDDLER

Posted 21 December 2012 - 03:35 PM

Also, it's a bit ironic one of the major selling points of the NRA and gun activists is to prevent tyranny, yet here they are advocating an increase in armed government agents in civilian places.

Bit fishy.

lol would you prefer private Blackwater agents?

#35 Kevin Greene

Kevin Greene

    I Don't Want To Get Off On A Rant Here But....

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 18,911
  • Reputation: 4,239
HUDDLER

Posted 21 December 2012 - 03:38 PM

Because it's cheaper and more effective to be proactive than reactive.


If proactive means tighter gun laws perhaps eventually years from now it might have an effect, albeit slight with the number of guns already in the general public.
If proactive means an armed Police presence in Schools the effect would be immediate, although it would be more expensive, but we can put a price on a kid's life if you wish.

If there is law enforcement 24/7 during hours when children are present I would certainly hope another side effect would be less illegal drug availability to kids.

#36 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,711
  • Reputation: 2,351
Moderators

Posted 21 December 2012 - 03:39 PM

I'm actually not opposed to the idea at all as part of a mass effort of reducing shooting, but it just calls out the real motives of the activists.

Gun collectors want easy and cheap access to guns.

The NRA and the gun lobby want to make money.

By itself, security officers are a reactive band aid that will be expensive and have minimal impact other than for show. Personally I say take the funds collected from firearm registrations and use them to fund the security agents.

#37 Kevin Greene

Kevin Greene

    I Don't Want To Get Off On A Rant Here But....

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 18,911
  • Reputation: 4,239
HUDDLER

Posted 21 December 2012 - 03:41 PM

I'm actually not opposed to the idea at all as part of a mass effort of reducing shooting, but it just calls out the real motives of the activists.

Gun collectors want easy and cheap access to guns.

The NRA and the gun lobby want to make money.

Personally I say take the funds collected from firearm restrictions and use them to fund the security agents.


I would think any law passed would inckude this language.

#38 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,711
  • Reputation: 2,351
Moderators

Posted 21 December 2012 - 03:50 PM

If it does, we'd be the better for it.

#39 Gazi

Gazi

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 07-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,831
  • Reputation: 311
HUDDLER

Posted 21 December 2012 - 03:53 PM

Remember when the Black Panthers took advantage of 2nd amendment until Reagan passed Gun Control laws in California? With the approval of NRA

http://www.theatlant...f-guns/308608/#

#40 strik9

strik9

    Think before you post

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 143
  • Reputation: 2
  • LocationAtlanta
HUDDLER

Posted 21 December 2012 - 03:58 PM

So hunters were first largely unregulated and drove these animals to the point of extinction. Then government finally stepped in, imposed restrictions, required permits, and used the revenue to manage the wildlife and habitats, and now there's not a problem.

I wonder if there's anything we could learn from this...


No sir it was many activities that led to the destruction of the enviriment. It was gun enthusiest (sp?), whose paid/paying for it now. The piont I was making is firearms,archery equipment, and ammo are already heavily taxed. I don't want to be taxed even more. If parents want extra security at schools (rightfully so), let them pay for. I've mentioned multiple times I'm fine with educated regulation, but extra taxes no.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users