Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Seek and wiki will provide. Or at least me, 8-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Owners_of_America
That the droid you are looking for?
Would it work if the BATF was restructured and moved away from the DoJ? To the Department of Homeland Security, for example?
@ Fighteer: What's you view on...removing the NRA from the discussion?* Or maybe the Government could find some way of pre-emptively answering the NRA's arguments, making them powerless?
Then again, to misquote Ronald Reagan:
EDIT: There's a Useful Notes page on American Gun Politics. From there:
edited 13th Feb '13 2:58:41 PM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling OnIs the correct answer.
And herein lies the problem. You've got a considerable number of people who, basically, want to be George Washington. This is a group of people habitually prone to bouts of hysterical paranoia and some downright psychotic behaviour
. These are dangerous, crazy people with a serious hard-on for what modern observers would call insurgency.
Okay. Maybe I'm translating this wrong, but are they complaining about people with known mental problems not being allowed to have guns?
"You can reply to this Message!"I believe the Go A's objection to the mental health law was that some mental health issues are treatable and that it would be a far harder to have rights reinstated after treatment under that particular law.
As far as the UN small arms treaty and fears of the US having their firearms be confiscated, there's quite a bit of language going on there, but many feel safe in the idea that the US Constitution cannot be superseded by international treaty.
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!I think I need to buy some gun manufactory stocks...
Just kidding. But that guy seems really loosing touch with reality. Or he is simply that cynically calculating.
Fox shows its compassionate side again.
That Lady has my respect for the determination in taking up her right to vote.
edited 13th Feb '13 4:46:04 PM by 3of4
"You can reply to this Message!"There's a reason why there are 90 million gun owners and only 4 million NRA members. The thing is that Wayne's not doing anything the NRA members aren't already saying themselves. "Buy guns while you still can, voice your support by becoming an NRA member!"
People are buying up new NRA memberships, some are even buying them for other people who want one. And there's a lot of people who donate money to the NRA, who are not members, because they support the 2nd Amendment, but don't want to be linked to the NRA.
Like Fighteer said, the NRA is sometimes the only voice being heard on that side of the debate because it is the loudest and most organized, even when they say things that pretty much screw over part of the demographic they would benefit from having the support of.
edited 13th Feb '13 5:45:57 PM by DevilTakeMe
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!On the other hand, you have a whole lot of gun owners who look at the NYPD or LAPD's antics of late and quite understandably think "yeah, I really don't want them to be the only ones with guns."
Or shitloads of people in the countryside a ten-minute drive from the nearest police station (at least one that's actually open — I'm in a small suburban city and the nearest operational station is several miles away because the close one is shut down most of the week) and quite understandably want a weapon for themselves because for the first 15 minutes of a confrontation you're completely on your own.
edited 13th Feb '13 6:41:39 PM by Pykrete
So you'd rather be the one who shoots back at the LAPD and becomes the subject of a statewide manhunt, then gets cornered in a cabin in the middle of nowhere and burned to death? That doesn't strike me as a superior option, frankly.
edited 13th Feb '13 6:51:32 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I'M BACK BABY!
Did y'all miss me?
Senate to vote Friday on Chuck Hagel
Representative Ryan: Obama delusional on debt
Scott Brown signs with Fox News
Dick Cheney praises Marco Rubio: 'I'm a big fan'
Governor Jindal's popularity at home has suffered dramatically since the last survey in 2010.
BTW have Rubio and Rand Paul given there responses to Obama's State of the Union speech?
edited 13th Feb '13 7:09:19 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016I'm sorry but I cannot take seriously anyone that wants guns so they can combat the government. Protecting yourself from criminals is one thing and I have no issue with that. However protecting yourself from "tyranny" is basically saying that you're willing to become a terrorist. Considering these types typically watch Fox News I feel I have grounds to be concerned if that's their argument. They love to whip people up into a frenzy over imagined outrages so we could have mass shootings from nutbags reacting to phony information. Even if they didn't go off half-cocked I have yet to see any evidence they could actually win once the tanks and drones are called in. We're basically putting a bunch of innocent people at risk for no benefit.
edited 13th Feb '13 7:20:15 PM by PotatoesRock
"John Boehner is the best communicator since Ronald Reagan. Take sip of water here."
I'm a skeptical squirrel@Fighteer: That's the actual danger of Officer Dorner: people who the LAPD have screwed over (or who are just pissed at the world and need a convenient target) might take him as an icon and start copycat amoqs, and then LA becomes unpoliceable as any nut with a gun can take down a couple of cops before he's finally shot himself.
While the LAPD leadership might well deserve this, and (as individuals) I would refuse to call some of those who decided to rebel (Dorner is not on this list) morally wrong, that doesn't make it any less of a headache for everyone in the crossfire.
edited 13th Feb '13 7:36:12 PM by Ramidel

I talk about the NRA because it is the driving force behind the gun lobby. It might as well be the only voice, because it's the only voice that's being heard. Take it away, and only then do you have the possibility for reasoned debate. The government has the power to fix the BATFE. It does not have the power to "fix" the NRA.
edited 13th Feb '13 2:48:57 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"