NRA and the Russian connection

[imported_tajmahal]

Lol! Congrats on a copy and pasting amendments you still don't understand. I'm not sure how you think your post addressed that point.

Because they are easy to understand, even with a public school education. It's only partisan political fvckholes like you that try to pretend they're so difficult to comprehend and understand.

 

[Jhhnn]

Because they are easy to understand, even with a public school education. It's only partisan political fvckholes like you that try to pretend they're so difficult to comprehend and understand.

Just for you, Taj-

 

[ivwshane]

Because they are easy to understand, even with a public school education. It's only partisan political fvckholes like you that try to pretend they're so difficult to comprehend and understand.

Thanks for proving my point, shit for brains.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Thanks for a cartoon, now piss off.

Just for you, Taj-

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Thanks for a cartoon, now piss off.

Such a badass.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Thanks for proving my point, shit for brains.

It's just that I get tired of you elite liberal asswipes and your idea that only the politically gifted and left-wing among us can figure out the Constitution and it's up to you to dictate what it means to us poor conservative peons in the flyover areas. Get over yourself.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Just for you, Taj-

what separates a "hunting rifle" from an "assault rifle"? an AR-15 can certainly work as a hunting rifle (many states have a requirement that game be taken with a centerfile rifle..which most AR's would qualify). and a classic "hunting rifle" often fires a much more powerful round than an AR-15...

i've seen plenty of facebook posts and op-eds say "you shouldn't be able to own weapons of war", but i can almost promise you that if you showed someone an M1 garand, they'd so "go ahead, i don't care about it", despite the fact that an M1 garand was in fact a weapon of war with US military issue and fires a more powerful round than an AR-15

a lot of it seems to be the perception that black rifle = scary evil assault weapon. and i suppose to a certain degree, perception is reality, even if that's not technically correct.

 

[BoomerD]

We arrived here by Constitutional means & we'll come out the other side in the same fashion. How & when that will happen is indeterminate but it will happen one way or another. If Congress or the Cabinet doesn't remove Trump prior to the election we'll just need to keep our institutions as strong as we can & vote him out. This Government of the People will survive Trump.

If the Dems can't come up with a better candidate than Hillary or Bernie...look forward to another 4 years of orange lunacy.

It's sad to me...the people elect Republicans for their conservative "smaller government" ways...but they thrash the economy...so the people elect Democrats to FIX that economy...then, once things are going well again...the same people elect Republicans to "shrink the "bloated" government...and they fuck up the economy...so the people elect Democrats to fix the economy...AGAIN.....then...well...you see the pattern?

 

[ivwshane]

It's just that I get tired of you elite liberal asswipes and your idea that only the politically gifted and left-wing among us can figure out the Constitution and it's up to you to dictate what it means to us poor conservative peons in the flyover areas. Get over yourself.

Sounds like you need a safe space.

 

[darkswordsman17]

what separates a "hunting rifle" from an "assault rifle"? an AR-15 can certainly work as a hunting rifle (many states have a requirement that game be taken with a centerfile rifle..which most AR's would qualify). and a classic "hunting rifle" often fires a much more powerful round than an AR-15...

i've seen plenty of facebook posts and op-eds say "you shouldn't be able to own weapons of war", but i can almost promise you that if you showed someone an M1 garand, they'd so "go ahead, i don't care about it", despite the fact that an M1 garand was in fact a weapon of war with US military issue and fires a more powerful round than an AR-15

a lot of it seems to be the perception that black rifle = scary evil assault weapon. and i suppose to a certain degree, perception is reality, even if that's not technically correct.

Maybe you should take that up with gun manufacturers for intentionally marketing things in that manner, and the NRA for intentionally trying to muddy the waters so as to screw over legislation?

Also, for many people yes, any gun is a "scary evil assault weapon" because, get this, they generally are capable of killing shit. You're actually helping the case of people going "outright banning and destroying assault rifles won't fix the issue, we should be looking at more comprehensive gun control" because yes there are more powerful and more deadly guns. Handguns are easier to conceal. Rifles can hit shit and you'd never even know where it came from.

Absolutely your average person doesn't know specific shit about guns, receivers, grips, barrels, mechanisms, stock, etc, etc. Acting like that means that they aren't qualified to be able to talk about gun related killings is a fallacy. Not only that but that is also routinely used to dismiss people pissed off about how the NRA has turned our government into a fucking disaster. They openly fucking gloat about how they've muddied things intentionally so they can sit there and go "gun regulations are bullshit because they're based on ignorance" when they're the ones that are pushing the ignorance. Its not like the ATF is super on board anyway, hell look at how we keep getting "we don't need new regulations, half the stuff people suggest are already regulated but they don't actually actively do anything about them", and then they wonder why people are pissed off? And then even more pissed off when gun nuts brag about all the fucking loopholes? But guess what would happen if the President specifically told the ATF to get off its ass and really regulate the shit. We'd have gun nuts literally fucking trying to overthrow the government. Hell, just them banning assault weapons (that was fairly specific and hardly did much of anything to hurt gun owners - and yes hardly did much to positively impact crimes) was enough to get a bunch of them to blow up a goddamn building (and planning to do possibly more), and they've only gotten less sane since then. Now we can't hardly even talk about it let alone consider it because any amount of policing this issue whips gun nuts into a psychotic fury and they start talking about committing acts of terror. Yet these same assholes are cheering the government showing up in literal military equipment over police brutality protests. (Oh, by the way, there's a very strong connection between gun nuts and racists, but yes its everybody else being ignorant that is the real problem).

I mean, by that logic, we apparently shouldn't have laws on much of anything because I can almost guarantee you that your average politician and person is not an expert on much of anything legislated. That's why they consult experts (not that's not perfect, but its the best of the options, and for every single issue there's going to be gray areas come up, among other issues that can arise from even the most well intended of laws). Only in this case, the experts are often gun manufacturers that bribe them to be intentionally obtuse and basically ban them from even approaching other experts to research gun related issues. And then they want to blame others for being ignorant. Its a fucking farce. And its causing problems far beyond the 2nd Amendment, because the NRA is intentionally stirring up political unrest and fomenting conspiracy theories while they also manipulate politicians. There is a direct correlation between the rise of the modern Republican party and the modern NRA. Its not a coincidence that the NRA started losing its goddamn mind around the same time as Republicans did.

Sorry the rant isn't really fully directed at you, but acting like you don't know why people have gone this route is getting absurd. Its because gun manufacturers started marketing in such manners to try to improve gun sales and appeal to insecure people who want to pretend they're ultimate badasses like Ah-nuld and Stallone in the movies. They intentionally wanted people to equate it with owning military weapons. It'd be like if a car company made an armor plated, tracked vehicle, and put a small slow firing gun on it and sold it as a tank, and then wondered why they were so popular with people wanting to kill people, and scoffing at people saying "maybe we should be limiting the stuff meant to mimic a fucking tank? We should ban depleted uranium bullets while we're at it even though they're not being used by people doing that type of stuff, its just logical" by going "psh its not even a 100+mm gun, and they aren't bullets, its a depleted uranium penetrator! And depleted uranium penetrator isn't legal because they're full on military weapons! Its actually technically an APC anyway! God why are people so fucking stupid?!?"

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

It's just that I get tired of you elite liberal asswipes and your idea that only the politically gifted and left-wing among us can figure out the Constitution and it's up to you to dictate what it means to us poor conservative peons in the flyover areas. Get over yourself.

So many buzzwords tajjy.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

what separates a "hunting rifle" from an "assault rifle"? an AR-15 can certainly work as a hunting rifle (many states have a requirement that game be taken with a centerfile rifle..which most AR's would qualify). and a classic "hunting rifle" often fires a much more powerful round than an AR-15...

i've seen plenty of facebook posts and op-eds say "you shouldn't be able to own weapons of war", but i can almost promise you that if you showed someone an M1 garand, they'd so "go ahead, i don't care about it", despite the fact that an M1 garand was in fact a weapon of war with US military issue and fires a more powerful round than an AR-15

a lot of it seems to be the perception that black rifle = scary evil assault weapon. and i suppose to a certain degree, perception is reality, even if that's not technically correct.

Most are like me (most not all) today when they say assault rife/military rifle its not about the looks it’s about the rate of fire, magazine capacity and overall ease of use.
I’m fine with ARs being sold, I do think we need to limit how many rounds they carry and pass laws regarding making modifications to them.

 

[Jhhnn]

what separates a "hunting rifle" from an "assault rifle"? an AR-15 can certainly work as a hunting rifle (many states have a requirement that game be taken with a centerfile rifle..which most AR's would qualify). and a classic "hunting rifle" often fires a much more powerful round than an AR-15...

i've seen plenty of facebook posts and op-eds say "you shouldn't be able to own weapons of war", but i can almost promise you that if you showed someone an M1 garand, they'd so "go ahead, i don't care about it", despite the fact that an M1 garand was in fact a weapon of war with US military issue and fires a more powerful round than an AR-15

a lot of it seems to be the perception that black rifle = scary evil assault weapon. and i suppose to a certain degree, perception is reality, even if that's not technically correct.

I'm sorry to have to say so, but you really don't get it at all. You're obfuscating & making excuses for firepower freaks.

Sustainable firepower is the essence of modern military rifles. It's what designers have sought since the first lever action repeaters of the US Civil War. They've learned a lot along the way, resulting in the magazines, cartridges & semi auto/ select fire designs of today. They're highly developed & specialized firearms, purpose built for killing lots of people quickly in combat situations. Older designs aren't nearly as effective.

They're also state of the art for massacring Salvadoran villagers or any group of civilians. Their utility for hunting is highly limited, being too much gun for rabbits & too little for deer or other large game. They're total overkill in self defense scenarios.

They're also fun to shoot & feed into a variety of violent fantasy scenarios making them the weapon on choice for militia nutbars everywhere. The occasional civilian massacre is the price we pay for indulging such fantasies.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Sounds like you need a safe space.

It's called Texas, and i'm already here. BTW how did that big anti-NRA vote go in Florida?

 

[HomerJS]

Senate Intel committee confirms....
Kremlin Used NRA to Help Trump in 2016

https://www.thedailybeast.com/kreml...mp-in-2016-says-senate-intelligence-committee

 

[hal2kilo]

Yeah but he was never gonna win cuz he was an independant. He had to run with the Democrats just to get time on the debate circle and when he got ahead they shot him down.
Then they said they dont have to go with the lead candidate cuz they are a private organization and can do whatever they want.
Fuckin asshole cock gobblers.

Nice story bro.

 

[deathBOB]

what separates a "hunting rifle" from an "assault rifle"? an AR-15 can certainly work as a hunting rifle (many states have a requirement that game be taken with a centerfile rifle..which most AR's would qualify). and a classic "hunting rifle" often fires a much more powerful round than an AR-15...

i've seen plenty of facebook posts and op-eds say "you shouldn't be able to own weapons of war", but i can almost promise you that if you showed someone an M1 garand, they'd so "go ahead, i don't care about it", despite the fact that an M1 garand was in fact a weapon of war with US military issue and fires a more powerful round than an AR-15

a lot of it seems to be the perception that black rifle = scary evil assault weapon. and i suppose to a certain degree, perception is reality, even if that's not technically correct.

Why doesn’t the military use hunting rifles or the garland anymore? Because assault rifles are a lot better at killing people.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Why doesn’t the military use hunting rifles or the garland anymore? Because assault rifles are a lot better at killing people.

No they should use forks and knives because as our gun enthusiasts like to point out, plenty of people in China are killed by them.

 

[deathBOB]

No they should use forks and knives because as our gun enthusiasts like to point out, plenty of people in China are killed by them.

I’ve heard the assault rental truck is also an incredibly devastating weapon.