NRA Bashing

Immediately attack him personally. Typical liberal response. If you don't agree with me, it's because you are a bad person. :no:

How do you argue with that? There's consensuous. No all these prominent scientists, etc. disagree. Oh, they're just greedy bastards. (I'm not homophobic, but Emoticons are gay).[/quote]

Concensus you say? I say, ship of Fools. So, what are his credentials other than having worked for Green Peace? In whatever capacity. Do you remeber the prominent scientists who claimed cigarettes were okay?

It doesn't really matter whether you believe in climate change or not. The rest of the world, Wall Street, and the open market (WalMart, Tesco, Callifoure Groups, Safeway, etc.) have already decided and moved on. so like it or not, carbon footprinting is coming regardless of what tweedle dee says to the contrary. I could go into further but this thread is about being afraid of losing your guns.

Really emoticons are kinda gay. I don't ususally girly up my stuff with happy and sad faces, but that doesn't make it a bad thing.

don taylor said:

Dude,
Being in the industry, do you see the way global warming is being used as a profit making scheme?

Being in the industry, are you aware that many scientists are rewriting their opinions on the subject?

Click to expand...

I don't think it's a profit making scheme, although some will undoubtedly scheme it for profit. So to answer your question, yes, there will be opportunities for profit, and unfortunately some charletons eager for a quick buck will emerge to provide negative examples that nay sayers will glom onto and point to as the industry wide norm. fact is there have always have been, and always willl be, snake oil salesmen who game any sytsem. It's that people without integrity problem again.

Real scientists don't rewrite opinions for money. (those would be charletons, see above.) True scientists adjust their thinking as new knowledge presents itself and is vetted through analysis and questioning. That's how scientific understanding progresses, changes, and sometimes reverses itself as new things are learned. That's what science is, the continual search for truthful understanding of the world around us and how it works.

BTW: Chris and others, I'm not pro gun control. I am for seeking ways to address idiot gangstas and criminals having excessive fire power to harm the rest of us. My problem with the NRA is their rufusal to be constructive in dealing with these serious problems, and always playing the "their out to take away our guns" card. I'm tired of them crying wolf, and wish they's save it for the real thing and get on with the business of solving the problems that give anti-gun folks the fuel that fires their agenda.

Dudejcb, I respect your point of view. :thumbsup: I have really no info on NRA other than what I have heard or read up here in Canada. I guess I am just saying that we have the same sort of problems here and same type of arguments. I have owned firearms for 25years and have been a responsible firearms owner, as have all of my friends. We have gang violence, robberies,domectic violence etc. Even under gun control conditions , it still does not stop the misuse of firearms here. Canada does not have exotic weapons like what you folks have in the States but there are those that want to start bans on certain types of firearms in my country. This is in response to public pressure to curb gangs and homicides.But if Canada, with its lower crime rates ....are still not safe enough. That would suggest to me that it is zero tolerance that we are heading toward. Maybe zero tolerance on gun crimes might work.......stiffer sentences with guns used in the crime. I dont know really what will work if the measures we have implemented here in Canada still havent quiet the anti's ofthe north.

Here's why I think the NRA takes a hard line on any laws that seem restrictive to ownership, I'm going to use an example that has just happened where I live:
Five years ago the local Town Council, tired of complaints from newer residents moving from the in close suburbs and from one member of said Council, passed a local ordinance that required anyone storing an unlicensed or classic vehicle on private property had to store it out of view. This was interpreted to mean covered by a car cover. We're not talking cars in pieces, just cars without regular titles. No problem, good idea. Fast forward to this past Thurs. Only one of the original Council members remains, new Mayor is former member. New members, at the urging of the now former member who started the original complaining, enacted an ordinance banning any un-licensed vehicle on private property unless in a garage. This is a town where less than 20% of the residences have garages (5-1 vote). The plan for an ordinance by the end of the summer to limit car ownership registered at any one address to no more than three vehicles is now on track to be followed by a local registration fee of (this was a blue sky number) $500-$1000/year/vehicle. This is an example of creep, which is what the NRA opposes, regulate/ban one firearm type (ex. semi-autos) then regulate/ ban the next (ex. pumps) and so on. In the interest of full disclosure I was the "No" vote, and the holdover member. Also the only Council member of 6+Mayor without a garage. I also have 7 cars. Driveway and street parking.

Chris Bishop said:

we have the same sort of problems here and same type of arguments. I have owned firearms for 25years and have been a responsible firearms owner, as have all of my friends. We have gang violence, robberies,domectic violence etc. Even under gun control conditions , it still does not stop the misuse of firearms here. Canada does not have exotic weapons like what you folks have in the States but there are those that want to start bans on certain types of firearms in my country. This is in response to public pressure to curb gangs and homicides.But if Canada, with its lower crime rates ....are still not safe enough. That would suggest to me that it is zero tolerance that we are heading toward. Maybe zero tolerance on gun crimes might work.......stiffer sentences with guns used in the crime. I dont know really what will work if the measures we have implemented here in Canada still havent quiet the anti's ofthe north.

Click to expand...

Chris, thank you for articulating my point better than I did. The problem is not responsible gun ownership, it's crime.

Why can't we, as responsible gun owners, join the conversation about how to affect crime, rather than go to the polar extreme of thinking this necissarily has to be about gun control? why can't we (and the NRA) engage in a productive dialogue, and substantive action, to remedy the problem? This may not cure the problem, but it surely will not re-enforce the anti's argument (and perhaps we willl learn some lessons along the way about how to effectively deal with criminals).

I have lived long enough to realize that confrontation, generally, does not work. Collaboration and alignment of purpose may not work either, but at least we are no longer "the enemy" of the anti's.

At its root level this is not about guns and we all know that. It's about bad people who use guns (and the internet, and whatever else they find handy) to do all of us wrong.

I would like to see constructive conversation and less polarizing rhetoric so we, as a society, can move forward, work together, and deal with these a$$holes , and quit picking at each other while the probolem grows.

Thanks again,

Dude