How The NRA Built A Massive Secret Database Of Gun Owners

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
The writer of the article is apparently an idiot, there is absolutely no problem with the NRA maintaining information. It's not like they are tapping illegally into people's calls/internet/mail or something, they are just data mining.

More whining by the irrational anti-gun zealot establishment.

This. This is no different than the thousands of other companies out there that data mine, including Anandtech.
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,309
1,209
126
And when you have some evidence that a majority of Americans support a de-facto ban on guns, I'd like to see it.

Touche. Well played sir, I stand corrected.
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,240
2
76
how is keeping a database of paying members 'building a secret database'

eveyr NRA memeber doesnt even necessasrily own a firearm

let alone know the make/model of every gun they own like certain people want to do
 

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
This. This is no different than the thousands of other companies out there that data mine, including Anandtech.

And you don't worry about those lists being hacked/leaked either and they never are, so there's no problem.

No problem at all.
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,240
2
76
And you don't worry about those lists being hacked/leaked either and they never are, so there's no problem.

No problem at all.

there is no need to worry about this one ANY MORE than any other random place you are a member to that you know has this info

its far far different than what the troll reporter is likening it to
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
So, uhh, Wayne LaPierre's nearly $1M annual compensation package has nothing to do with politics & personal power seeking?

What planet are you from, anyway?

He's paid that money to protect the 2nd amendment, and if he ceased doing so he would no longer be paid.

I'm from planet reality. You must be from our neighbors.
 
Last edited:

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
there is no need to worry about this one ANY MORE than any other random place you are a member to that you know has this info

its far far different than what the troll reporter is likening it to

I think the difference is that gun-owners have ardently said they do not wish such a registry to exist. Should it be leaked... well... then the government has it.

Seems like it ought to at least raise some eyebrows. But I don't really give a toss personally.
 

BlueWolf47

Senior member
Apr 22, 2005
653
0
76
I still don't understand why registering guns is so dangerous. I mean i don't worry about the government coming and taking my car.
 

Angry Irishman

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2010
1,883
1
81
I doubt that teh eebil gubmint is, either.

The NRA is really an industry group, created to froth up gun owners & promote sales.

It's their job to convince everybody that what they need is more guns, bigger guns, guns that hold more ammo, guns that will keep the Commies, the home invaders, the rapers & the Terrarists! off your lawn & out of your living room, not to mention gubmint agents.

That's why they have their database & what they use it to accomplish.

The one thing that all too many people forget is that a statement doesn't have to be true to "make a good point", one that preys on their fears & prejudices in a ruthless fashion.

In that, the NRA is highly effective.

Uhhh....have you noticed New York's gun laws or California's?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Jhmhmhnjhmmm has quickly made himself one of the most useless posters in this forum. And that's saying a lot.


So, this thread is really about the usual union-bashing that werepossum provided? Really?

And your usual contribution is something more than snide derision, huh?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
He's paid that money to protect the 2nd amendment, and if he ceased doing so he would no longer be paid.

I'm from planet reality. You must be from our neighbors.

So the second amendment is protected by irrational fearmongering rants? Or does that really do more to plump up gun manufacturer profits?

And it's worth a million bucks a year to get that when some of our forum members do it for free?

Might want to consider that nutcase spokesmen give all gun owners a bad name, particularly when the insanity is obvious & the New York Daily News & the New York Post comment on it-

http://www.mediaite.com/online/ny-p...-wayne-lapierre-is-the-craziest-man-on-earth/
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Uhhh....have you noticed New York's gun laws or California's?

Not particularly, since I don't live there.

Perhaps you'd care to list & explain the aspects of those States' laws you find to be objectionable?

In a clear, concise & detailed fashion so that everybody can appreciate your concerns, of course. Don't tell us what you think might happen, either. Just tell us the way it is.

I challenged another member to lay it out earlier in this thread, but all I got was crickets...
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
I think the difference is that gun-owners have ardently said they do not wish such a registry to exist. Should it be leaked... well... then the government has it.

Seems like it ought to at least raise some eyebrows. But I don't really give a toss personally.

The nra doesn't make regulation, doesn't control the purse strings and doesn't secretly monitor citizens. Guys who doors.now maybe you can understand why it's more of an issue when the government keeps these lists.
 

BlueWolf47

Senior member
Apr 22, 2005
653
0
76
The nra doesn't make regulation, doesn't control the purse strings and doesn't secretly monitor citizens. Guys who doors.now maybe you can understand why it's more of an issue when the government keeps these lists.

Apparently you don't understand how lobbying and drafting legeslation go hand in hand. The NRA is a political lobbying group. Have you noticed that any republican seeking to win a primary has to polish the NRA's balls to get an endorsement.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
Apparently you don't understand how lobbying and drafting legeslation go hand in hand. The NRA is a political lobbying group. Have you noticed that any republican seeking to win a primary has to polish the NRA's balls to get an endorsement.

Which lobby polished the NSA balls?
 

Angry Irishman

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2010
1,883
1
81
Not particularly, since I don't live there.

Perhaps you'd care to list & explain the aspects of those States' laws you find to be objectionable?

In a clear, concise & detailed fashion so that everybody can appreciate your concerns, of course. Don't tell us what you think might happen, either. Just tell us the way it is.

I challenged another member to lay it out earlier in this thread, but all I got was crickets...

You know what? I'm not here to do research papers for you. I get no college credits as a result. You know damn well what I and others are referring to in terms of recent radical gun legislation....look it up yourself. This is an internet forum...nothing more, go baiting elsewhere.

Oh yea, this statement is concise? "I doubt that teh eebil gubmint is, either".
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
You know what? I'm not here to do research papers for you. I get no college credits as a result. You know damn well what I and others are referring to in terms of recent radical gun legislation....look it up yourself. This is an internet forum...nothing more, go baiting elsewhere.

Oh yea, this statement is concise? "I doubt that teh eebil gubmint is, either".

In other words, you got nothin' other than faith based innuendo & empty accusations of "radical gun legislation" that you can't even begin to substantiate. You merely refer to what you believe as if it were fact.

It's Truthiness through & through.
 

Angry Irishman

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2010
1,883
1
81
In other words, you got nothin' other than faith based innuendo & empty accusations of "radical gun legislation" that you can't even begin to substantiate. You merely refer to what you believe as if it were fact.

It's Truthiness through & through.

I would have bet anything that would be your response. Why? Because it's so incredibly typical of your behavior. Bait and switch tactics.

You know damn well what I'm referring to it just doesn't fit in your agenda. You think you've won some kind of intellectual battle here....funny.

Go back and defend your original statement of doubting the government's taking guns....in a very sarcastic way I noticed. You can't, because factually New York and California are doing just that to citizens of those states.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
I would have bet anything that would be your response. Why? Because it's so incredibly typical of your behavior. Bait and switch tactics.

You know damn well what I'm referring to it just doesn't fit in your agenda. You think you've won some kind of intellectual battle here....funny.

Go back and defend your original statement of doubting the government's taking guns....in a very sarcastic way I noticed. You can't, because factually New York and California are doing just that to citizens of those states.

Why would I believe that to be true? Simply because you say so?

You've made certain assertions & accusations, then simply refused to back them up, because the truth doesn't fit your agenda.

Bait & switch? How lame are you? Having made accusations, refusing to back them up & getting called on it, you now attempt to make me the issue, rather than your own paranoid panderings & misrepresentations.

Are some state govts confiscating guns from convicted felons? Yes. Do you have a problem with that? Do you think they should be able to keep their guns, or not? Should people with serious mental problems (James Holmes, for example) be able to own guns?

Step right up & give you opinion on the real issues, not on the ones in Wayne Lapierre's imagination.
 

Angry Irishman

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2010
1,883
1
81
Why would I believe that to be true? Simply because you say so?

You've made certain assertions & accusations, then simply refused to back them up, because the truth doesn't fit your agenda.

Bait & switch? How lame are you? Having made accusations, refusing to back them up & getting called on it, you now attempt to make me the issue, rather than your own paranoid panderings & misrepresentations.

Are some state govts confiscating guns from convicted felons? Yes. Do you have a problem with that? Do you think they should be able to keep their guns, or not? Should people with serious mental problems (James Holmes, for example) be able to own guns?

Step right up & give you opinion on the real issues, not on the ones in Wayne Lapierre's imagination.

Do I really have to go search the internet for the laws on the books in NY and CA just to appease you? I didn't write or vote into existence these laws; they aren't assertions or accusations. There is language in both states laws that clearly mandate conditions to take away weapons from owners. The laws I reference go well beyond taking weapons from convicted felons (like that really matters) or Constitutional precedence.

There are plenty of laws on the books now that deal with a potential buyers mental capacity and background checks that the feds don't enforce anyway. Do we really need more?

Should I trust in your doubt that the government will not continue to erode our rights? Given the track record lately of issues that further eleveate mistrust in our government I'd have to say no. In fact, I'd have to say I doubt that I very much doubt that there will NOT be further erosion of our rights (apparently not just our second amendment) based off of everything stemming from the downright deceitful/intrusive activity of the NSA and IRS that has come to light.
 
Last edited:

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
I trust the NRA to do what they say they're going to do, to protect and defend the 2nd Amendment. I wouldn't trust the government to walk my fucking dog.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Do I really have to go search the internet for the laws on the books in NY and CA just to appease you? I didn't write or vote into existence these laws; they aren't assertions or accusations. There is language in both states laws that clearly mandate conditions to take away weapons from owners. The laws I reference go well beyond taking weapons from convicted felons (like that really matters) or Constitutional precedence.

There are plenty of laws on the books now that deal with a potential buyers mental capacity and background checks that the feds don't enforce anyway. Do we really need more?

Should I trust in your doubt that the government will not continue to erode our rights? Given the track record lately of issues that further eleveate mistrust in our government I'd have to say no. In fact, I'd have to say I doubt that I very much doubt that there will NOT be further erosion of our rights (apparently not just our second amendment) based off of everything stemming from the downright deceitful/intrusive activity of the NSA and IRS that has come to light.

Asked simple direct questions, you dodge, pontificate & duh-vert.

Not that I expected anything else.
 

Angry Irishman

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2010
1,883
1
81
Asked simple direct questions, you dodge, pontificate & duh-vert.

Not that I expected anything else.

You can interpret my response however you please....I really don't care. You act like this forum is some kind of high school debate club and participants get points for their actions.

I'll say it just one more time. You know exactly the laws I'm speaking of....look them up yourself. There have been multiple posts on here discussing those very laws enacted by New York and California. I haven't dodged shit or pontificated anything I'm just not appeasing you which apparently must be frustrating for you. My words have been plainly written; no interpretation required.

Why don't you prove your statement for once. You doubt the government will take weapons? Prove that government hasn't enacted legislation at the very least the state level to take away citizens weapons. Ten to Twelve pages, make sure you have the correct spacing and cite all of your sources correctly....no plagiarism. Homework is due this time next week. Less sarcasm will get you extra points.
 
Last edited: