Why is the NRA so powerful?
It gives a lot of money to politicians.
Here is a list of the members of Congress who get the biggest contributions from the NRA.
At the top of the list is Senator John McCain. Since Senator McCain has a malignant brain tumor and is in a position to vote his conscience, maybe he will surprise everyone and demand strict gun control. Not just background checks, but controls that prevent civilians from buying military weaponry.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Link doesn’t work!
LikeLike
Thanks, Stephen.
Fixed the link.
Try this: https://nyti.ms/2xTIALY
LikeLike
When it comes to guns, I feel like a stranger in an alien land. I just don’t get this infatuation and obsession with guns. It’s like being in love with a screw driver or a toaster except that a gun is specifically designed to kill and or maim/injure. After these horrific massacres, it should be a no brainer to enact stricter gun laws. Unfortunately, the GOP politicians and some Democrats are “paid” to have no brains when it comes to gun control. The GOP is even being evasive and non committal about banning these bump stocks which turn a semi-automatic into a machine gun. Can we be any more stupid as a country? If I had my druthers, I would repeal the 2nd amendment and send it to the toxic garbage dump along with the electoral college.
LikeLike
I predict that bump fire mechanisms will soon be banned. Politically, it is a disposable, throw away position that will only be opposed so that the NRA and its sock puppet politicians can draw their existing lines in the sand even deeper by allowing this mostly Pyrrhic victory. The crocodile tears will be profuse right after the ban. The trigger mounted modifications are so simple to build that the ban itself will be all but meaningless. Anyone with basic DIY skills can put one together.
LikeLike
That’s quite true. In a similar scenario, some evil genius or not so genius can easily make a bomb in his/her spare time but it would still be against the law. Bump stocks and whatever similar gizmos should be made illegal. If you get caught, then you would be subject to the laws, as is the case for just about anything we regulate.
LikeLike
The fines for possession should be at least $20,000. All records of those selling them should be confiscated, if need be via unannounced FBI raids and the information used to track down all buyers.
LikeLike
Diane
If I remember correctly the Obama AFT approved the bump stock
Diane Feinsteins bill will stop 🛑 the next incident – not worth the paper but it makes one fill good that something is being done
LikeLike
I have no knowledge of the history of the bump stock. I do know that the list of NRA money guys are almost all GOP. I don’t recall Obama advocating for less gun control. After Sandy Hook, he urged gun controls but was blocked by Republicans.
LikeLike
Diane,
one of a few links – since bump stocks, never heard of them before Vegas – but the Dems did:
Titus, Democrats introduce measure to ban sale of bump stocks …
https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/politics-and-government/titus-democrats-introduce-measure-to-ban-sale-of-bump-stocks/ –
16 hours ago … The Titus bill serves as a companion to a measure announced earlier in the day by Sen. … But bump stocks were approved by the Obama administration to help … The government did approve the sale of bump stocks in 2010.
I hope you get to listen to Chucky Shoooomer on the Senate floor and his call to all the dead from Vegas in heaven ,,,, is he for real? You noted the Republicans and donors …. interesting –
LikeLike
The NRA just announced that it supports legislation to ban bump stocks, so I guess Congress now has permission to impose the ban. Apparently this is a simple device that can easily be built by a craftsman at home.
I favor banning ownership of all military weapons by civilians. Only officers of the law should be armed. But I don’t have $30-50 Million to buy votes.
LikeLike
The NRA provides a perfect example of how politicians are prostitutes, that campaign contributions are not an example of free speech, as Citizens United and McCutcheon want you to believe, but of the business model of prostitution. Many retired politicians who have not gone on to consulting or stink tanks have said that they and all of their peers spend about 1/2 of their time “dialing for dollars” instead of working on behalf of their constituents and the nation. Day in day out, they need to collect a lot of money from a lot of donors, and this is why they will accept relatively small amounts of money to change their votes to ones not supported by their constituents. They need to keep all of their “Johns”, the larger donors happy so they keep coming back. All of the Johns know each other and of their mutual interests and beliefs, so here is found the significant leverage the Johns have. If the Johns don’t like the services (votes) the politicians provide, they will evict the politicians from their “stroll” by funding a primary opponent who is willing to provide the services that the Johns demand of them. The party leadership, who have risen to become part time prostitutes, function as both pimps and brothel managers, making introductions and keeping the streetwalker politicians in line while keeping the Johns happy and secure in their power. In return for the parties services, the streetwalker politicians also raise money and provide other promotional services for the party whorehouse as well as for the businesses and front groups of the bigger donors. As with actual prostitution, most all of the Johns don’t want it widely known that they are clients, so their desire to remain anonymous via dark money, shell corporations and other front groups and methods is also explained by the prostitution model. The Gerrymander also plays a roll in all this as it is easier for the party to keep their prostitutes on the street if all of the neighbors can be made to believe that worse things will happen if “that other whorehouse”, the one that does those “immoral and dangerous” things takes over the local turf. The Gerrymander lets the politicians turn the electoral system on its head by choosing their voters. All the voters get out of it is the devil they know vs. the one their devil tells them is worse. They do not get representation or democracy. This is why all federal and state elections must be publicly funded ONLY, with not even the candidates own money allowed, and why the Gerrymander must be banned at the federal level.
LikeLike
Yes, but… Let’s keep our eye on the ball. It does no good to bemoan legislators & their campaign-funders as pimps & prostitutes, all these players are just moving predictably according to the rules of the game.
We have, as a country, undermined democracy through deregulation of industry & banking since the ’80’s, creating trickle-up inequality, then compounded it (courtesy of those empowered trickled-up powermongers) via free-for-all campaign-funding/ lobbying/ revolving door legislator> hi-pd employee of campaign-donor– we’re even winking at nepotism now.
At this point, elected reps owe more to for-profits & NGO’s than to constituent voters. Change that, & you change everything.
LikeLike
Imagine if we had the same Neanderthal knuckle-dragger attitude towards safety measures in cars as we do towards gun control? Oh wait, initially there was a lot of opposition to safety measures in cars by the auto industry, the usual right wingers and just plain dopes. The car makers said that it would add greatly to the price of cars and they claimed that the real problem was bad drivers not design flaws in cars. But thanks to Ralph Nader and other progressives, we have seat belts, shoulder/lap belts, air bags, safety glass, padded surfaces, crush zones, collapsible steering wheels and many other safety measures. Nobody thinks about it anymore and accepts that these things are a net positive, are worth the money. The car makers use these safety measures as advertising and selling points. I remember when people used to say that seat belts were an infringement on their freedom of movement in a car, I kid you not. That’s how stupid it used to be.
LikeLike
Umm… OK, Nader spurred car-safety, but ultimately legislative changes were pushed by the auto-insurance industry, whose data showed auto-safety measures would save them $.
Do we have anything parallel re: gun-control? & if not, why not?
LikeLike
Diane,
From C-SPAN comes this partial comments from Chucky Schuuuumer:
Chuck Schumer
WITHOUT OBJECTION. MR. SCHUMER: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. NOW, AS WE CONTINUE TO GRIEVE WITH THE PEOPLE OF LAS VEGAS, THE FAMILIES OF THE INJURED AND THE DECEASED — AND I THINK OF THE PICTURES I SEE OF THOSE BEAUTIFUL YOUNG PEOPLE WHO HAD THE BEST OF LIFE AHEAD OF THEM — YOU ACHE FOR THEM, BUT OUR THOUGHTS MUST TURN TO ACTION SO THIS DOESN’T HAPPEN AGAIN. WHAT CAN WE DO AS A NATION TO CHANGE, BECAUSE SURELY WHEN THERE ARE MORE MASS SHOOTINGS THIS YEAR THAN THERE ARE THE NUMBER OF DAYS THIS YEAR, WHEN WE AVERAGE MORE THAN ONE MASS SHOOTING PER DAY, SOMETHING HAS TO CHANGE. I’M SURE IF YOU ASKED THE GRIEVING FAMILIES, DO THEY WANT THE LAWS TO CHANGE SO THIS MIGHT NOT HAPPEN AGAIN, THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY WOULD SAY YES. THEY WOULD WANT US TO DO SOMETHING. IF WE COULD TALK TO THOSE BRAVE SOULS WHO WERE KILLED AND ARE NOW IN HEAVEN, THEY WOULD SAY, DO SOMETHING. THEY WOULDN’T SAY, LET’S WAIT. THEY WOULDN’T SAY, LEAVE THINGS ALONE. THE FACT THAT THEY WERE KILLED, THE FACT THAT THERE ARE SO MANY INJURED, THEY WOULDN’T THINK IT IS POLITICAL TO TRAY AND SAVE THEIR LIVES — TO TRY AND SAVE THEIR LIVES OR PREVENT SOMEBODY ELSE FROM DYING THE WAY THEY DID. SO WHEN FOLKS SAY, DON’T BRING POLITICS INTO THIS, IT’S INAPPROPRIATE — AND I AM SURE THAT THE FAMILIES OF THE LOVED ONES WHO WERE LOST WOULD AGREE WITH ME THAT IT IS APPROPRIATE AND IMPORTANT AND NECESSARY. POLITICS IS WHERE WE’RE SUPPOSED TO COME TOGETHER AND DEBATE THE GREAT PROBLEMS OF OUR TIME IN ORDER TO FIND SOLUTIONS TO THEM. POLITICS IS HOW WE’RE SUPPOSED TO MAKE OUR COUNTRY A BETTER, SAFER, MORE PROSPEROUS PLACE TO LIVE. AND THERE IS NO MORE APPROPRIATE TIME THAN NOW TO TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE OF GUN VIOLENCE. NOW, YESTERDAY PRESIDENT TRUMP VISITED LAS VEGAS. I’M GLAD HE WENT TO SHOW OUR SOLIDARITY AND REMIND EVERYONE THERE THEY HAVE THE FULL SUPPORT OF THE NATION. BUT HE DIDN’T TALK ABOUT GUNS. THERE’S A HUGE OPPORTUNITY HE MISSED TO LEAD THIS NATION IN A REASONABLE, MODERATE DEBATE ON GUN SAFETY. BUT THAT OPPORTUNITY IS NOT OVER. THE PRESIDENT STILL HAS THE OPPORTUNITY. ALL EYES ARE ON THE PRESIDENT TO SEE IF HE’LL GRASP THE OPPORTUNITY AND LEAD THE NATION TO DO SOMETHING REASONABLE AND MODERATE ABOUT GUNS AND GUN SAFETY. PRESIDENT TRUMP, ARE YOU GOING TO WAIT TO HEAR WHAT THE N.R.A. SAYS FIRST? ARE YOU GOING TO WAIT FOR THE N.R.A. TO GIVE YOU THE GREEN LIGHT? YOU RAN YOUR CAMPAIGN SAYING YOU WERE BEHOLDEN TO NO ONE. YOU FASHION YOURSELF AS A STRONG MAN. WELL, ARE YOU GOING TO SHOW THAT YOU ARE NOT BEHOLDEN TO ANYONE NOW? ARE YOU GOING TO SHOW YOUR STRENGTH NOW? ARE YOU GOING TO BE THE FIRST PRESIDENT, REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT, IN A GENERATION TO BUCK THE N.R.A.? MR. PRESIDENT, YOU KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS. I SAY TO PRESIDENT TRUMP, COME OUT AND SAY THAT YOU SUPPORT AND WOULD SIGNING A LAW TO BAN BUMP STOCKS, THE MODIFICATION USED BY THE LAS VEGAS GUNMAN TO MAKE HIS WEAPONS AUTOMATIC. THAT IS SMALL, AND IT’S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. DON’T WAIT FOR THE N.R.A. TO MAKE UP THEIR MIND. DO IT. OF COURSE, BUMP STOCKS CAN’T BE OUR ONLY RESPONSE. IT’S HARDLY ENOUGH, EVEN THOUGH WE SHOULD DO WHATEVER WE CAN IN THIS BODY IN OBEISANCE TO THE N.R.A. WE MUST DO MORE. ABANDONING EFFORTS TO DEREGULATE SILENCERS WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP. THE POLICE WERE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THE GUNMAN WAS BECAUSE OF THE NOISE FROM HIS GUN IN THE MANDALAY BAY TOTAL. LET’S FORGET ABOUT IMPLEMENTING A NATIONAL CONCEALED CARRY RECIPROCITY. MY POLICE OFFICERS IN TIMES SQUARE DON’T WANT TO LET SOMEONE WHO HAS HAD NO CHECK, WHO MIGHT HAVE A MENTAL DERANGEMENT LIKE PADDOCK COME TO TIMES SQUARE AND THEY CAN’T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. THAT’S WHAT THIS LAW WOULD DO. ANY OTHER HEAVILY POPULATED PLACE. DOWNTOWNS OF MANY OF OUR BIG CITIES, AND EVEN MEDIUM-SIZED CITIES. WALT DISNEY WORLD, BASEBALL GAME, FOOTBALL STADIUM. IF THIS CONCEALED CARRY RECIPROCITY PASSED, CRAZY PEOPLE COULD CARRY WEAPONS CONCEALED INTO ANY FOOTBALL STADIUM IN AMERICA, AND THE POLICE COULDN’T CHECK ON THEM. AND THEY COULDN’T SEE IF THEY HAD A GUN. SO WE HAVE TO DO THESE THINGS. AND THE MOST IMPORTANT AND ATTAINABLE THING TO DO, IF YOU LOOKED AT THE THING THAT WOULD BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE IN STOPPING ALL THIS GUN VIOLENCE, THE DAILY GUN VIOLENCE THAT’S DOABLE, IT WOULD BE ADOPTING UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS. IT’S COMMENCE, IT’S MEASURED, IT’S PRUDENT. IT WOULD BE REALLY EFFECTIVE. THE BILL THAT SENATOR MURPHY INTRODUCED YESTERDAY IS ONE THAT I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH FOR A LONG TIME, AND WE SHOULD SEE IF WE CAN GET ENOUGH SUPPORT TO PASS IT. WE CAN AND SHOULD TALK ABOUT THESE ISSUES MORE. IT REQUIRES ONLY A MODICUM OF POLITICAL COVERAGE. PRESIDENT TRUMP AND REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS OUGHT TO SHOW THAT MORAL AND POLITICAL COURAGE NOW BY BUCKING THE N.R.A. AND ENGAGING IN A REASONABLE DEBATE ABOUT COMMONSENSE GUN LAWS. FULLY AUTOMATIC WEAPONS ARE ALREADY ILLEGAL. MADE SO BY A LAW SIGNED BY PRESIDENT REAGAN IN 1986. BANNING BUMP STOCKS IS ENTIRELY CONSISTENT WITH THE BOOKS. SENATOR FEINSTEIN HAS INTRODUCED A REASONABLE PROPOSAL HERE. WHAT ARE WE WAITING FOR? THE N.R.A. TO GIVE US A GREEN LIGHT? THAT IS SO WRONG. IF THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS ARE SO BEHOLDEN TO THE N.R.A. THAT THEY CAN’T DO THE VERY BARE MINIMUM, BANNING A DEVICE THAT ALLOWED A SHOOTER TO KILL 59 AMERICANS WITH EASE, A DEVICE WHOSE BAN WOULD IN NO WAY INFRINGE UPON THE LEGITIMATE RIGHTS OF GUN OWNERS AND OUR POLITICS, OUR MEANS OF MAKING THIS COUNTRY A BETTER, SAFER PLACE WILL HAVE ONCE AGAIN FAILED US.
What is interesting about his mentioned above comments deserves some comparison thoughts. how about all of those babies who’ve been killed by Planned Parenthood and asking them what they would be saying, if they could speak. They would be saying, “Do something. Shut down Planned Parenthood.” There are over a million abortions a year in the United States of America, dwarfing the number of homicides every year. It’s been the case since 1973, minimum.
And who it is, who is it that’s beholden to the NRA? You gave a list so I am sure you can list those beholden to the Planned Parent Hood – it’s a long list! = the Democrat Party. The Democrat Party and every other faction of the Democrat Party is beholden to Planned Parenthood. If we could talk to those brave babies who were killed in the womb and are now in heaven, they would say, “Do something.” They wouldn’t say, “Let’s wait.”
Senator Schumer, are you gonna wait to hear what Planned Parenthood says first? You fashion yourself as a strong man, Senator Schumer. Are you gonna show that you’re not beholden to anyone now, including Planned Parenthood? Are you gonna show your strength now? Are you gonna be the first senator on the Democrat Party side to buck Planned Parenthood? I say to Senator Schumer, come out and say that you support and would sign a law to ban abortions.
LikeLike
J Scheidell,
I give to Planned Parenthood. Their clinics provide vital health services to women.
The NRA =death.
LikeLike
Diane the action called for is to defund PP with our tax dollArs 💵
I dont mind the other services they supply but they are the organization of death
LikeLike
I have never used Planned Parenthood but I will continue to send money.
Why should a woman have a rapist’s child? Why should a 13-year-old have a baby after she made a mistake?
You will pay taxes to support many of these children.
Being pro-life means paying the cost of child care, Health care, education.
LikeLike
Thanks for posting Schumer’s words here, they are good words.
But I do not appreciate your attempt to equate anti-abortion law with gun-control law.
Personally I could never abort a pregnancy. In fact my husband & I had fertility trouble, & found a paucity of babies to adopt in the ’80’s.
Research showed that was less about abortion, more about social acceptance of bearing/ keeping out-of-wedlock babies. In fact our local sch district had a daycare/nursing-station for unwed mothers pursuing hs diploma.
Meanwhile I had a number of friends who’d had 1+ abortions & subsequently could not conceive. In fact when I approached my gyn about infertility her very 1st Q was how many abortions have you had? Seems aspiration & D&C do damage to the uterine walls, & later, zygotes can’t latch on.
My point is that those who abort 1 or several babies are often sacrificing the ability to ever bear a child. People who do this are most likely in dire straits. Maybe not up to you & me to makea law preventing it. Meanwhile, no equivalence whatsoever to laws restricting the ability of someone to mow down multiple innocents by virtue of allowing them to purchase/ possess multiple automatic [or convertible-to-automatic] firearms.
LikeLike
Has anyone cross-checked the leadership of the NRA to see how many also belong to ALEC or how many ALEC members belong to the NRA?
LikeLike
The NRA has less than 5 million paid members. Most gun owners do not belong to the organization. About 180 million Americans own at least one firearm.
Politicians listen to the 180 million, with much more enthusiasm, than to the NRA.
LikeLike
And yet polls show that most Americans, including gun owners, support gun control.
LikeLike
I support reasonable restrictions on firearm ownership. The Congress does not always do what most Americans want.
LikeLike
Diane
Chicago has some of the most stringent gun control laws and the death rate is huge One needs to take a look at the individual and you might say what laws do you want that would have prevented this or another future incident. He bought the guns legally He was back ground checked. What law prevents a crazed individual?
LikeLike
Most of the guns collected in big cities after crimes were committed were not legally obtained. Many have been traced to specific gun ships that don’t do background checks. The maniac in Las Vegas passed every background check.
If I lived in another country and planned to travel, I would avoid the US. Too dangerous.
LikeLike
Diane, and Bethree5,
Comparison of numbers of deaths – yes, there are valid circumstances for the abortion -but take those numbers out and you still have PP numbers up into the hundred of thousands – those are the ones we subsidize federally.
The NRA’s a civil rights organization, a lobbying group. A civil rights organization trying to protect our civil rights to protect and defend ourselves, which is enshrined in the Constitution. They’re defending the Second Amendment. The NRA is not agents of death. They do not advocate either. They don’t even get close to it.
The support for gun control laws seemingly comes to the forefront when incidents of this magnitude confronts us – then almost immediately the left is on the bandwagon to do something. We listen to Pelosi, Chucky Schumer Hollywood elites etc and now late night comedians and we get hit with the crying call to do something – yet, where were these same people over the Chicago deaths? St. Louis?
I laugh when Hollywood goes after gun control – these are the same people that can afford protection and they use guns, and yes, take a look at the properties they liven and they are surrounded by WALLS! Talk about hypocrisy.
You mentioned money donated. The NRA donates three and a half million dollars to over 400 candidates since 1998, three and a half million dollars to over 400 candidates. But Planned Parenthood gave candidates over $38 million just last year alone! That’s more than 10 times as much as the NRA donates in just one year.
Some of the money comes from taxpayers. There is federal funding that goes to Planned Parenthood, or has been. Not to mention everybody in Hollywood’s required to donate to them. Not to mention every other leftist group is required to prop up Planned Parenthood. Thirty-eight million to candidates alone last year.
The NRA, three and a half million dollars to 400 candidates since 1998 Here comes Mrs. Clinton on Fallon the other night weighing in going nuts on the NRA. And she provides another falsehood on tv! She claimed that Trump made it easy for the mentally handicapped to attain guns – nope, didn’t happen. explained at the time, the repeal of the Obama-era regulation, “doesn’t allow people to buy guns who have been properly adjudicated by a court of law as mentally ill or unstable.” From the Examiner:
“The Obama-era rule was designed to take away people’s rights without due process of law. It would have flagged the names of people who, for example, have an anxiety disorder or depression which keeps them from working, and who, as the SSA puts it, ‘need help in managing [their] personal money affairs,'” he added. “As the many non-political mental health and autism advocacy groups that supported the House action noted, there is no link between these factors and a propensity for violence.”
“Republican lawmakers were joined in their opposition to the regulation by a number of disability and civil liberty advocacy groups, including the American Association of People with Disabilities, the American Association of People with Disabilities, the Arc of the United States, the Association of Mature American Citizens, the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, the National Council on Disability, the National Disability Rights Network and the American Civil Liberties Union.”
Like the GOP, these organizations held that the Obama gun regulation posed a threat to civil liberties. They also argued that the now-defunct regulation stigmatized the disabled.
Also, it’s worth noting that there are already regulations on firearm purchases by persons who have a documented history of mental illness, or who have shown themselves to be a danger.
LikeLike
Trump is acting on behalf of the NRA to allow people with a history of mental illness to buy weapons.
LikeLike
Q Trump is acting on behalf of the NRA to allow people with a history of mental illness to buy weapons. END Q
Do you have any documentation, or on-the-record statements to back up this claim?
LikeLike
Trump Signs Bill Revoking Obama-Era Gun Checks for People With Mental Illnesses
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-signs-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun-checks-people-mental-n727221
LikeLike
Mrs. Clinton on Fallon the other night weighing in going nuts on the NRA. And she provides another falsehood on tv! She claimed that Trump made it easy for the mentally handicapped to attain guns – nope, didn’t happen. explained at the time, the repeal of the Obama-era regulation, “doesn’t allow people to buy guns who have been properly adjudicated by a court of law as mentally ill or unstable.” From the Examiner:
“The Obama-era rule was designed to take away people’s rights without due process of law. It would have flagged the names of people who, for example, have an anxiety disorder or depression which keeps them from working, and who, as the SSA puts it, ‘need help in managing [their] personal money affairs,’” he added. “As the many non-political mental health and autism advocacy groups that supported the House action noted, there is no link between these factors and a propensity for violence.”
“Republican lawmakers were joined in their opposition to the regulation by a number of disability and civil liberty advocacy groups, including the American Association of People with Disabilities, the American Association of People with Disabilities, the Arc of the United States, the Association of Mature American Citizens, the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, the National Council on Disability, the National Disability Rights Network and the American Civil Liberties Union.”
Like the GOP, these organizations held that the Obama gun regulation posed a threat to civil liberties. They also argued that the now-defunct regulation stigmatized the disabled.
Also, it’s worth noting that there are already regulations on firearm purchases by persons who have a documented history of mental illness, or who have
LikeLike
I strongly agree, that seriously mentally ill people, with homicidal tendencies, should not be permitted access to deadly weapons. Nevertheless, the fact is, that mentally ill people, are much more likely to be the victim of crime, than to be a perpetrator.
There is no specific 100% reliable way to predict who will commit a crime. We do not a “Department of future crimes”, like in the movie “Minority Report”.
There are no Ouija boards, that the police can use.
LikeLike
Congress Says, Let the Mentally Ill Buy Guns
“For all their dysfunction, the Republican Senate and House have managed to act with lightning speed in striking down a sensible Obama administration rule designed to stop people with severe mental problems from buying guns” …
LikeLike
Not to mention my very own sister who used to be a fine elementary teacher and is now retired and a card carrying member of the NRA. Why, I don’t know. The only reason to own a gun is to kill or hurt something or someone. I went to a Teachers for Social Justice event where they loused up my t-shirt, “Just Let Me Teach”. In talking to a friend, I heard this thought: We don’t have a teacher shortage. We have a teacher exodus!”
LikeLike
Many people own firearms to protect themselves if someone breaks in their house when they are home. Yes, the only reason to own a firearm is to kill someone … in some cases to kill someone else before they kill you.
“An estimated 3.7 million burglaries occurred each year on average from 2003 to 2007. *A household member was present in roughly 1 million burglaries and became victims of violent crimes in 266,560 burglaries.”
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/vdhb.txt
All homicides
Firearm homicides
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm
Since so many Americans have firearms in their homes, a burglar is playing Russian roulette when they break into a house. What would happen if no one owned firearms for protection when you were at home?
Owning a firearm is a form of insurance, but there is no logical reason that firearm should be a machine gun that fires hundreds of thousands of rounds a minute.
A shotgun is good for home defense (the insurance that makes burglars think twice before they break in).
LikeLike
Mary, I am a gun owner and I have no plans “to kill or hurt something or someone”. I live 10 miles from town with no neighbors close enough to hear my scream. Law enforcement response is a minimum of 15 minutes, probably longer depending on where the sheriffs are and what they are doing. I am a gun owner because I may find myself in a position where my life may depend on it. The second someone steps into my home without an invitation the state gives me the authority to shoot and to kill if I fear for my life. I won’t hesitate and I’m thankful that I have the right to defend myself. I also have the right to use my gun to shoot a charging bear, cougar, mountain lion and whatever else threatens me when I am anywhere on my property or hiking in the woods that surround my home. My friend is a rifle owner and so is her husband. Their lives depend on those rifles because they hunt to supplement what food they can afford to purchase at the grocery store to feed their family. Neither one of us needs a bumpstock to supplement our semiautomatic weapons, but we do NEED our weapons. Millions of us live outside the bubble of a big city. We all have different lives and different needs. Please don’t judge my needs by your needs.
LikeLike
You are a lucky dog. Please consider those millions of us who don’t live in rural isolation. I don’t have any lions, tigers, or bears where I live. Even you might want to go to a concert or a football game, where you will be in a crowd. Why should psychopaths have military weapons? I bet you don’t need an AR 15 for protection.
LikeLike
England/Wales has much more stringent weapons control laws than the USA. Crime rates in the UK are much higher than the USA.
Consider the rates of “hot” burglary (Where the victim is present during the crime). The UK rate is much higher. In the USA, burglars tend to avoid homes, where the occupant is armed. See
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/crime-rates-in-england-and-wales-worse-than-us-2042216.html
LikeLike
How does a crook know that an occupant has firearms and is waiting to shoot them? Can the crook see through walls?
And here is a comparison of crime stats between the US and the UK
The UK is ranked 42nd for crime levels vs 30th for the US
Murders caused by firearms.
UK is ranked 44th.
The US is ranked 10th – one hundred and thirty-eight times more than the UK
For total crimes, the UK is ranked 4th.
The US is ranked 1st – 82-percent more than the UK
Violent crimes – intentional homicide rate
The UK is ranked 74th
the US is ranked 7th
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime
Charles, have fun cherry picking the facts to find a few or at least one that supports your thinking.
LikeLike
I am unable to open the link to the list of congressmen.
LikeLike
Juanita, try again. The original link was wrong. I replaced it.
LikeLike
Link didn’t work for me.
Sent from my iPhone
>
LikeLike
Diane,
Your following comment has no validity “Trump is acting on behalf of the NRA to allow people with a history of mental illness to buy weapons.”
My source was the Washington Examiner – see the above note posted at 7:47 pm and 1234AM
The mentally ill adjudicated by court are still not allowed to attain guns
LikeLike
Trump is a puppet of the NRA.
LikeLike
The NRA is a civil rights organization (among other things). It claims to be the oldest civil rights organization in the USA. see
https://mic.com/articles/23929/10-surprising-facts-about-the-nra-that-you-never-hear#.xhe9r4IcP
LikeLike
The NRA a civil rights organization? Thanks for the chuckle. I think of it as Murder inc.
LikeLike
The NRA does many things. One of their functions, is to defend the civil rights of firearms owners. See
https://www.nradefensefund.org/
The 2d amendment is a civil right. The NRA defends the 2d amendment.
Therefore, the NRA is a civil rights organization.
LikeLike
2nd Amendment
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
The 2nd Amendment does not give people the right to own any firearm that is available. It only allows them to keep and bear Arms. That means the Congress and the courts have the right to limit what Arms the people can keep and bear.
Congress has never attempted to ban most of the people from keeping and bearing Arms — the question is what Arms should the people be allowed to keep and bear and under what circumstances?
Home defense (what is an adequate firearm for home defense?)
Hunting where legal (What is an adequate firearm for hunting?)
Sharpshooter competitions on firing ranges. (What is an adequate firearm for sharpshooter competitions at firing ranges?”
LikeLike
Diane,
Charles C. W. Cooke and his piece at National Review.
“In truth the Second Amendment was not an “amendment” at all, for, unlike some of the subsequent alterations to the charter, it represented neither a change in policy nor a remedy for an error.”
The Second Amendment didn’t change anything, and it didn’t fix anything. “Along with the rest of the Bill of Rights it was the product of a disagreement as to how to best protect freedoms that were generally considered unalienable.” The founders believed that rights and liberty came from our creation and not men, not government, not other people. All the left wing commentators think the liberties come from govt – now Diane – that is definitely a belly laugh ! Think F Chuck Todd.
“For reasons outlined in The Federalist Papers, Madison believed that the power of the federal government would be constrained by its structure; if the central state had only a handful of carefully enumerated powers, he contended, it would not be able to exceed them.” And that’s in fact what the Constitution is. It enumerates what the government cannot do. It spells out what the powers are and none more. Now, the anti-Federalists disagreed with that.
The debate that followed was strictly structural — not a fight over speech or due process or arms, but over how best to ensure the maintenance of ancient liberty.”
This is what the Constitution is, a charter of liberty and how to maintain it. Let’s enumerate them.”
Madison was just codifying the liberties and freedoms that were considered proper at the time. “They were channeling Justinian, Locke, and Blackstone, and ensuring that the people of the new country would enjoy a robust right to self-defense, and the auxiliary protections that enabled it,” i.e., arms.
The NRA hasn’t killed anyone; they have a very strong program on training and safety in use of fire arms. But now your Planned Parenthood is opposite to that fact.
LikeLike
NRA = Murder Inc.
LikeLike
Q The 2nd Amendment does not give people the right to own any firearm that is available. It only allows them to keep and bear Arms. That means the Congress and the courts have the right to limit what Arms the people can keep and bear. END Q
All of this is true. None of our rights are absolute. (There is no right to shout “fire” in a crowded theater, regardless of the 1st amendment).
The congress/courts have restricted the right to keep and bear arms. There is no legitimate self-defense or hunting purpose to fully-automatic weapons. These are banned, and fine just for having one of these weapons can run as high as $250,000.
LikeLike
Does every state fine citizens that own automatic weapons?
LikeLike
The federal penalties for illegally possessing a fully-automatic weapon are severe. Obviously, the laws in the several states, will vary. Here is a summary:
https://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/rpt/2009-R-0020.htm
I repeat, there is no legitimate self-defense or sporting purpose for individuals possessing fully-automatic weapons. These weapons should be banned.
There are many points, which 2d amendment supporters and people who wish to restrict firearms rights, can agree on.
-Banning silencers and flash suppressors
-Point of sale background checks.
-Limiting purchases of large amounts of ammunition
-Teaching gun safety to children
-Banning armor-piercing “cop-killer” bullets.
etc.
LikeLike
How about – banning weapons from people who are all certified by doctor to be mentally ill and/or citizens convicted of a felony who served time in prison?
LikeLike
Lloyd
The certified mentally handicapped by medical profession cant get guns as noted in court proceedings
LikeLike
Lloyd
How Can A Convicted Felon Receive Firearm Rights?
Written by J. Hirby and Fact Checked by The Law Dictionary Staff
The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right of all U.S. citizens to bear arms except in certain circumstances. One of these circumstances is if you are a convicted felon. Felons often find it difficult to have applications for firearm rights accepted, especially if they were convicted of violent crimes. For felons with a criminal record, it is harder but not impossible to legally own a gun. They just need to go through the necessary bureaucratic and legislative processes.
Step One: Figure Out Who Charged You With The Crime
Depending on whether the felony was a state or federal offense, a convicted felon’s process of getting the rights to bear arms will vary. This is known as adjudication and will involve contacting the Department of Justice in the state or one of several federal agencies.
How It Works
Many states and agencies have an existing form for felons to apply to have their civil rights restored. Generally speaking, these forms will only be accepted if the person can prove that their life has changed and that they are reformed. The person may be required to show proof such as a steady job and ties to the community, and they may need to wait a significant amount of time before being allowed to apply. The process involves finding this form and filing it with the appropriate authorities.
Potential Pitfalls
It is easier to get civil rights restored if a felony conviction was given by a state court rather than a federal court. However, a problem arises when state laws conflict with federal laws, which are often stricter and may take precedence even if the conviction was ruled by state authorities.
If this is the case or if a felon had his conviction given by a federal agency, they will have to file with the U.S. Attorney General’s office or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. The agency will then review an application to restore rights to bear arms. The problem then becomes that this agency is notorious for simply failing to review the documents, leaving former convicts in a sort of legal limbo while waiting for their firearm rights to be restored. This is the case even if felons were not guilty of violent crime convictions.
The only other federal recourse is to petition for a presidential pardon. This process requires the assistance of a lawyer and can restore a variety of civil rights including the right to hold public office in addition to the right to bear arms.
Law Dictionary: How Can A Convicted Felon Receive Firearm Rights?
LikeLike
In a few weeks, we are going to have a gubernatorial election here in Virginia. The Republican, Gillespie, has earned a “A” rating from the National Rifle Association. see
https://edforvirginia.com/2017/05/11/gillespie-earns-nra-rating-dems-get-fs/
The Democrat, Northam, has earned an “F” from the NRA. see
Although 20% of the state’s population resides in Fairfax County, the state is still primarily a rural state, with a solid, pro-2d amendment electorate.
This election is going to be close, and gun rights will figure prominently in the decision.
LikeLike
Charles,
you might want to take a moment and review the following link – a more detailed crime statistic broken down by types and uses the various differences in definitions
Dispelling The Myth | Why The United Kingdom IS NOT More Violent …
For a definition of “homicide” in the UK I’ve relied on The Crown Prosecution Service – Legal Guidance. (CPS – LG hereafter.) In order to compare these with US …
LikeLike