NRA official only speaks for the manufacturer

remember this. Those who beat their guns into plowshares will end up working for those who don't.

Worldwide there has been over 56 million people murdered after dictators like Hitler, Stalin and Saddam Hussein disarmed their countrymen. What's the difference between a president and a dictator? Armed citizens. Remove the guns, you no longer have a free society. This hostory books are full of examples of how people start dying after being disarmed. In fact, guns in the hands of the people was the only reason Japan didn't invade the lower 48 states during WWII. Are you willing to give up your guns for a false sense of safety?

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

I've been an NRA member all my life, and I can too you this. Whom ever said 86% of the NRA members support a ban on assault weapons is a bald face liar. NRA members know that a ban on one weapons leads to a ban on others. Liberals are always looking for an anchor point from which to start a national ban on all firearms. They know if they ban one, they can ban another, and still another. Their opposition to banning assault weapons has nothing to do with the fact that most hunters don't hunt with them, but rather keeping the liberals from getting their anchor point.

Do I know hunters that hunt with assault weapons? I most certainly do. Would I hunt with one? Depending on the circumstances, I would, but as the norm, no. Maybe it's time for the people of this country to ask themselves one question. Why does the government want to ban your guns? If you think it's for safety, you’re wrong. It's all about control. So the next time you're ready to beat your guns into plowshares,

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Typical response from purebull, PURE B.S.! You claim to be smart,at least you think so, yet you cant even read a poll, any poll, all the polls say the same thing, 86% of current NRA members support an assault weapons ban, and you are the only bald-faced liar I know, I too have been an NRA member most of my life and I support the assault weapons ban, closing the "gun show' loophole and strengthening the universal background check. anyone who hunts with an assault weapon is a stupid ******* anyway, and wouldn't count in an intelligent, balanced disscussion, because they would fail a mental hygeine check and probably would fail a criminal check as well. you are a fear mongerer and keep spouting the same lies as the rest of the right-wing nuts. they dont want to take all guns away, just the useless, man killer ones. why is that so hard to understand? Do you know what 20 bullet-riddled first graders must have looked like? How could you be so blind?

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Any poll can be skewed to read any way you like by polling the same select group of people over and over. The liberals have been doing it for decades to make you think the people are behind them. Maybe Real is gullible enough to fall for such drivel, but I'm not. You'll never see the NRA, it's leadership or most of its members agree to a ban of any kind. If that were so, then why didn't they fall in behind Clinton when he shoved his assault weapons ban through? This isn't the NRA's first rodeo on the assault weapons issue, and it won't be the last. When a liberal supports a poll of any kind, you can bet it's an over-inflated piece of drivel their propaganda ministers hatched out.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

I sent an email today to three gun clubs I belong to with a combined membership of 800, all NRA members, and not one of them said they were polled, and none of them said they would even consider supporting a gun ban of any kind for any reason. Many of the members from which I received emails from, over 550 in all, said they would also contact other NRA members not in my circle of friends and see if there was any support for this so-called agreement to ban assault weapons. I am confident they will yield similar results. I've been a member long enough to know that no NRA member would support such a ridiculous ban.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PureNonsense does more to convince me of the need to have tighter regulation of firearms than any Liberal could. I like to shoot and AR-15s are big fun. Still, it is obvious that many people that can currently own these weapons aren't sane enough to have them. You just have to listen to the idiots that think that reasonable regulations are a danger to their civil rights to know that it is time to change the status quo.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Reasonable regulations DO NOT include the banning of firearms. The banning of firearms is communistic, not reasonable. One ban leads to another, and still another, until all of them are banned. Liberals cannot stop at reasonable regulation, they are gullible enough to think bans stop incidents like Columbine and Newtown. How well did the government do with Fast & Furious. How did that work for you What? How many people did the government get killed with their reckless distribution of full auto weapons south of the border? These idiots can't police their own organizations, and we should trust them with our 2nd amendment rights?

Many of the weapons used by drug cartels were supplied by the U.S. government, and as with Fast & Furious, they're still filtering into the United States and innocent people are being murdered with weapons our government sold to them. I have no problem with reasonable regulations, but outright bans, I'll never agree to them.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

What are you ranting about? No one is talking about banning firearms and what does Fast and Furious have to do with reasonable regulations? There are plenty of weapons that aren't legal to own without special licenses and we haven't been taken over by Communists yet. Lighten up, background checks at gun shows won't end up with camps.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Clueless liberals who love posting gun owners names/addresses in newspapers suddenly don't like the idea of putting signs in their own neighborhoods informing the public that their neighborhood is a "gun-free" zone. WHy is that liberals? Afraid of something besides law abiding gun owners? LOL. Liberalism is a brain malfunctioning disease. It causes folks to stop thinking or using common sense thus brain cells die a slow death by misuse or lack of use. Hypocrites on the left become more and more clear day by day. How hilarious these deceivers are to hear and watch. It's like past 5 years we've been watching a very bad cartoon with all the remarkably ignorant lefties falling over themselves to create a 'utopia' where they actually think they can have everything and won't end up having to pay for it all. Welcome to Obama's next agenda; HUMONGOUS Quadruple Taxation. LOL. They are about to 'feel' what socialism is. Wake up call is too late for you unsuspecting unthinking deceived

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

You need to wake up What, they are talking about banning gun, and first on their agenda is assault weapons. Where have you been? Assault weapons that are allowed to be sold in sports shops are not "Special" weapons requiring a license. Those guns are Class 3, full auto weapons and shotguns with magazines that rotate, like the Street Sweeper. AK47, M16's and AR15's are not full auto and do not require a Class 3 license.

The idea of banning them will have no affect on incidents like Newtown because you can't legislate common sense and sanity. Screwballs will always be screwballs and murderers will always be murderers. All this ban will do is create a bigger black market where criminals will purchase their weapons on the street and the only people hurt will be honest, law abiding citizens who have never committed a crime with their firearms, and most likely never will.

But you know that. Gun control is not abour security or safety, it's about controlling the people.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Banning a type of firearm is not the same thing as banning firearms. If a ban of weapons like an AR-15 is passed (highly unlikely) they would just fall under the licensing requirements that currently apply to full auto.

What might pass is a law to require background checks for all sales of firearms with an exception for transfers such as father to son. No big deal.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

You obviouslay don't know what you're talking about What. A banned firearm means you cannot own it under any circumstance. Class 3 weapons, like full auto machine guns can be owned because they are not banned. You need to stop commenting on subjects you know nothing about. It makes you look like a bigger fool than you are.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Just for the record, the NRA does not profit from their support of gun manufacturers or private citizens. They get nothing from the sales of these firearms, not do they make money from the membership. The money goes to fight legislation designed to steal your 2nd amendment rights.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

The NRA does get money from manufactures. Millions of dollars. Ruger announced in 2012 that they would donate $1 per firearm sold to the lobbying branch of the NRA (NRA-ILA) and raised $1.25 million. Smith and Wesson and Beretta have donated millions also but the didn't tie the money to sales numbers.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »