http://www.nraila.org/FactSheets.asp?FormMode=Detail&ID=15&EID=4476-1212003



Good reading. Enjoy:)

U.S. Catholic Conference, Dept. of Social Development

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

THey have a Dept. of social Development??? that's pathetic. they aren't doing a very good job

Instead of listing them, it should just read:

"All of Hollywood".

:rolleyes:

What about Tom Selleck...? He must feel very alone in Hollywood.

Hey, I'm a member of at least two of those organizations. Thanks for the reminder to renew my membership dues. :lol:

And, Richard Dean Anderson is listed there...how can you argue with MacGyver? :lol: :D

I hope Steve Buscemi shoots them all.

Can someone please convince Alec Baldwin to move to Canada, for God's sake. I thought he was supposed to do it after Bush became President, but he weaseled out.

And don't you think calling Pam Dawber an "actress" is being a bit generous?

If the ACLU were to treat gun ownership like they do many other issues they'd be badgering people to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.

:monkey the entire list!

Exercising my First Amendment rights,

boxman

Its so nice of the ACLU to spend their time defending groups like NAMBLA and their right to molest children and how to cover it up.

Originally posted by Ferg
What about Tom Selleck...? He must feel very alone in Hollywood.

Very true. It must be hard to be a descent person in that business. And, maybe I am just silly, but I watched his latest western movie(and I am not a fan of westerns), in part, due to stance. But of course, we all know Quiggly(sp) Down Under was the greatest from Tom.:)

Originally posted by Eric v2.0
U.S. Catholic Conference, Dept. of Social Development

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

THey have a Dept. of social Development??? that's pathetic. they aren't doing a very good job

That's funny that you single out the US Catholic Conference, but don't mention any of the other 15 religious-affiliated groups. :rolleyes: right back...

I fail to see how groups that support anti-gun organizations are suddenly completely discredited of all worth.

Whatever.

Originally posted by perret318


That's funny that you single out the US Catholic Conference, but don't mention any of the other 15 religious-affiliated groups. :rolleyes: right back...

I fail to see how groups that support anti-gun organizations are suddenly completely discredited of all worth.

Whatever.
I agree.

Nick C.

i love the use of the word "anti-gun". so anyone who has supported any kind of firearm regulation is automatically anti-gun. ****ing brilliant.

i am completely in favor of the second amendment, but the NRA is such a pathetic piece of **** organization that i feel ashamed to agree with it on anything.

Originally posted by SubEd
Instead of listing them, it should just read:

"All of Hollywood".

:rolleyes:

Not Phil Spector

Originally posted by Overtime
i love the use of the word "anti-gun". so anyone who has supported any kind of firearm regulation is automatically anti-gun. ****ing brilliant.

i am completely in favor of the second amendment, but the NRA is such a pathetic piece of **** organization that i feel ashamed to agree with it on anything.
First off, please do not go around the swear filter.

Second, I never used the phrase "anti-gun". I simply supplied a list of parties that openly oppose the 2nd amendment right to bear arms.



Please try to keep it clean.

http://www.glocktalk.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=1350293

First off, he didn't go around the swear filter he went through it.

Secondly, your a gun nut and the people on that list are the anti-gun nuts.

As for me, I am anti-gun in spirit, but since they'll never be able to get every gun off the streets and the bad guys will alwyas have them I'm glad I have a piece on my night stand.

Originally posted by Tex-WReX


http://www.glocktalk.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=1350293

this picture makes me sad. that's all I got.

-IggDawg

I think that picture rocks. Just wish it was a P99 instead of damn glocks.

K

The second amendment is taken out of context more often than Darwin.

-IggDawg

Maybe so, but a lot of things could be interpreted different in the constitution and amendments over 200 years later.

K

Originally posted by Mud Pig
First off, he didn't go around the swear filter he went through it.

Secondly, your a gun nut and the people on that list are the anti-gun nuts.

As for me, I am anti-gun in spirit, but since they'll never be able to get every gun off the streets and the bad guys will alwyas have them I'm glad I have a piece on my night stand.


No, actually I am a nut in this order-

Nuts about my Wife- Nothing else to say here

Speed nut- 2000 Hayabusa / 1998 GSX-R 750 / 69 Charger R/T Hemi powered / Fun little blue Subie

Dog Nut- 2 Aussie Shepherds

Family Nut- You can't choose your Family, right:)

Gun Nut- Too many to list, 2 full gun safes, 4 years in the Army, in Desert Storm, Bosnia, etc


So, if you are going to call me a nut, at least get the order correct.


Igg- I am not here to make you happy.

First off, please do not go around the swear filter.

the swear filter worked wonders on my post. care to elaborate?

Second, I never used the phrase "anti-gun". I simply supplied a list of parties that openly oppose the 2nd amendment right to bear arms.

i know that reason is pointless in this discussion, but understand that just because one supports gun regulation does not mean one supports the repeal of the 2nd amendment. giving any money to a cause which opposes the NRA, for example, can be misconstrued by simple minds as being "anti-gun." for example, someone might think that you have to undergo a background check to purchase an assault rifle. does that make them "anti-gun"?

it pains me to agree with the kind of people who would make an image like the one above.

Keep in mind, I have nothing against guns or gun owners. I have my reservations about this or that when it comes to gun control. But much I don't like organizations like the NRA that slant facts to support its own motives. that list screams propaganda in it's wording. "Anti-gun" is like "pro-life." gross generalization.

Much like religion, I have nothing against the people. just the organization behind them.

-IggDawg

Originally posted by Overtime


the swear filter worked wonders on my post. care to elaborate?




I'll give it a shot. Tripping or dodging the swear filter can land you in TO. Sorry you missed the memo.

TexWReX - Didn't imply that you were. I was just making a general statement about the picture. no flak to you in particular.

-IggDawg

EDIT - overtime: while I agree with your points, please watch your language. swearing doesn't help anyone's arguement.

I'm all for arming bears. Its about time it was a fair fight. Now they can shoot the hunter out of his tree stand like a racoon from a tree.

Lets see, the swear thing was an ill fated attempt at humor, pre-2nd cup of coffee:)


When it comes down to it, you can call me a gun nut. That's fine.


To be honest with you, I simply want to continue being able to defend myself, family, and possibly others. I went through all the steps for my Texas CHL permit. When Texas passed the CHL legislation, they strengthen other weapon related punishments. I thought that was great!


We have so many laws on the books, that simple enforcement, rather than a new law every few months, is a starting point.

Being a NRA member myself, I have seen the list they send out for political campaigns and such. They do label a person, candidate, etc. antigun if they agree on certain laws, points of view that lean towards anti-gun laws. For instance my candidate that I worked for thought there should be a 3 day waiting period and background checks, but was fine with people having guns after that. He was labeled strongly anti-gun. I favor these measures, but nothing else after that. I think one thing you have to consider is that once a anti-gun law is passed the anti-gun lobby and organization are going to puch for more laws and more stringent rules until no one has any guns. So, you can't give the anti-gun organizations anything to start with.

K

Originally posted by Tex-WReX
We have so many laws on the books, that simple enforcement, rather than a new law every few months, is a starting point.

I'll definitely agree with you on that. but short of random person searches there isn't much we can do.

-IggDawg

I can tell you that many Weapon manufactures are getting so much heat, that civilian sales will probably cease soon anyway. I think that Glock in positioning itself to be in the Military/LEO sales only in the next few years. They have also endorsed "bullet fingerprinting" in the near future.

I can tell you that many Weapon manufactures are getting so much heat, that civilian sales will probably cease soon anyway. I think that Glock in positioning itself to be in the Military/LEO sales only in the next few years. They have also endorsed "bullet fingerprinting" in the near future.

Yes, this is true, but I do not think civilian sales are going to cease. Maybe for a few manufacturers who want to sell to the military, but not all together. As for bullfingerprint, fingerprint identification on grips, and other means of safeties for pistols. These are things what will never fully work and will be easily modified and worked around.

K

Let me just get this "out" there. I am all for securing your firearms. People that allow children to access their firearms should be punished. There is no excuse for this. I have no children yet, but I still secure all weapons in a safe.

hey look actor PETER BONERZ...

"As for me, I am anti-gun in spirit, but since they'll never be able to get every gun off the streets and the bad guys will always have them I'm glad I have a piece on my night stand."
^^
Smartest post in this thread.

"We have so many laws on the books, that simple enforcement, rather than a new law every few months, is a starting point."
^^
Second smartest post in this thread.

"...random person searches..."
^^
dumbest post on this thread (sorry, Igg)


And how that picture offends anyone is beyond me. There would be no US flag without guns. Remember that little thing called the "American Revolution"?

Tex-WReX, I agree with you completely. There is no excuse for not securing your guns so they are out of reach of children, or anyone else for that matter. If you have children you should definitely educate them about guns also. Too many people don;t and bad things tend to happen.

K

Originally posted by JSpych

dumbest post on this thread (sorry, Igg)


Sorry I forgot to put in the [/sarcasm]. a little gets lost without any "tone of voice" being available. I'm very anti-"big brother."

-IggDawg

Whew! Thank god!

Then I take that back.

Our new dumbest post in this thread iiiis:

"I'm all for arming bears. Its about time it was a fair fight. Now they can shoot the hunter out of his tree stand like a racoon from a tree."

Originally posted by IggDawg
The second amendment is taken out of context more often than Darwin.

-IggDawg

Read it. Put it into context with the historical events that led to the revolution and the 2nd Amendments inclusion in the Constitution.

What's the intent?

boxman

I'll give it a shot. Tripping or dodging the swear filter can land you in TO. Sorry you missed the memo.

igg, i've been around way before the memo was passed.

"dodging" the filter involves putting spaces or symbols between letters so that the filter doesn't replace the word. that generally warrants a time out.

"tripping" the swear filter just replaces the bad word with harmless, less-than-offensive stars. this generally does not warrant a time out, though anything's possible if done in poor enough taste.

this info is probably in the FAQ. i haven't heard any mods come out against tripping the swear filter, though it's accepted that dodging it will get you a NASIOC vacation.

You people get all worked up over somebody trying to take your guns from you. If you have an illegal weapon just do what the rest of us do and don't talk about it or hand it over.

bump