Printable View
Hippifried, I am not sure that is as much the vast majority of the public isn't hip to the NRA hypocrisy as it is that enough of Congress is afraid of the NRAs financial might and honestly believe that the public is not going to vote on guns either way in the next election. It is after all the money they fear, not the masses and the majority of the NRAs money does not come from grassroots but rather powerful industrialists.
Over the last days:
27 year old Wisconsin man shoots himself when his bullet ricochet of a tree. He’s expected to survive.
A robber in Nashville drops his gun shooting himself in the leg, putting the lie to the NRA adage about only good guys with guns can stop ....you know the rest.
In Ohio two women were handling a gun when it discharged injuring both of them.
Off duty policeman accidentally discharges his weapon while investigating a crime scene. Only the window of a brewery was injured.
In Oregon a 29 year old man was cleaning his handgun when it discharged. The bullet passed through the wall into the adjoining apartment. Guns are for your protection. Feeling safe yet?
NRA firearms instructor Eugene Kenny, from Connecticut, shoots his own ankle. He says he’s a stickler on safety. He didn’t know there was one in the chamber. :roll:
In Oregon a retired law enforcement officer (sheriff’s captain) shot his hand while cleaning his pistol.
Meanwhile, a man in Pennsylvania also shoots his hand when his firearm suddenly discharges.
Mental Illness is not the only mental issue that is relevant to the question, “Should I sell a firearm to this person?” Too many silly people are allowed to own deadly weapons. The only thing that can stop a silly person with a gun, is LOOK OUT! DUCK!!
http://accidentalgunshots.tumblr.com/
If they couldn't deliver the votes, the politicians & press wouldn't pay them as much homage as they do. The NRA was a very well respected organization before the change of agenda, & still is, but they aren't what they used to be. I never hear them promote safety anymore. Over & over, it's just this constant paranoid rant about "the fast approaching gun ban" ad nauseum...
Things are so out of hand right now that one would think some social sanity is bound to prevail. Well... Hope springs eternal, but until we focus attention on this irrational fear of each other that drives this "debate" from all sides, we can't ever get a handle on guns without making the problem worse. This is a side show. "They" aren't "coming for your guns". The whole issue is a red herring from every angle. Divide & conquer in the age of democratic/republican governance. While we argue over the actions of a handful of crazies, the real issue of the power grab goes unnoticed. "Eye on the Prize!" The prize is control of your social security.
Exactly right. Once upon a time the NRA was very visibly promoting hunter safety and game conservation. You never hear the NRA complaining about diminishing wetlands anymore. Many of the older men in my family (including my father) were one time members. But that was at least a couple of decades ago. There has been a huge turn-over in NRA leadership and membership. It's been taken over by a cancer. But boy, can they sell guns like never before!Quote:
The NRA was a very well respected organization before the change of agenda, & still is, but they aren't what they used to be. I never hear them promote safety anymore. Over & over, it's just this constant paranoid rant about "the fast approaching gun ban" ad nauseum...
You betcha! First they dismantle the unions. Then steal your pensions. And finally social security. Where ever there's a big pool of money that hasn't been drained yet, that's where you'll find the fat cats and their political lackeys.Quote:
"They" aren't "coming for your guns". The whole issue is a red herring from every angle. Divide & conquer in the age of democratic/republican governance. While we argue over the actions of a handful of crazies, the real issue of the power grab goes unnoticed. "Eye on the Prize!" The prize is control of your social security.
That's pretty much everybody in a power position, right? While this circus, with all the shrieking & chest thumping goes on, I'm hard pressed to find anybody of import who isn't willing to take a meataxe to "entitlements" as an economic cure all.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
"They're" good at dividing the electorate. Those teachers over there are making too much money. They don't need those fat pensions. Those old folks on social security are wasting your tax money on hover chairs and luxury cruises. Those people on disability are all faking it. The magic hands of the market will fix everything if you just let them wander a little through your pockets. People are stupid and easily divided, always looking at the short term. The fat cats themselves only ever think about the short term. Draining this pool of money and that, rarely thinking about what they're going to do when all the pools have been drained and there's no one left to exploit. But hey, when all our entitlements are gone, we'll live by the gun, right? We'll be holding up grocery stores with our AK-47s for toilet paper.
Votes equal money. Everybody is afraid of being challenged in primaries and that becomes legitimate when you know that money from guys like the Koch Brothers and the NRA is going to stop following to you and to an opponent. That goes for Dems that the NRA has historically gone light on like Harry Reid.Quote:
Originally Posted by hippifried
I don't disagree that the continued assault on entitlements so we can protect the military-industrial complex, big finance, healthcare sector special interests and reduced taxation rates for the 0.05% of Americans, is a huge issue. But gun safety is a wedge issue until someone you know is victim of the loose regulatory structure in the US.
There's basically no way to fix anything without making some cuts to entitlements. This video explains it pretty well (and explains some other stuff too).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D319DsrxfUA
Point is, military and other discretionary spending is a fairly large portion of the budget, but it's nowhere near the size of entitlements. More importantly, discretionary spending isn't expected to double in size over the next 30 years. What this means is that something absolutely must be done with mandatory spending, and that something will probably involve cuts. Sorry. Making that assertion doesn't at all have anything to do with protecting the military-industrial complex. It's just the harsh reality.