Pro-Gun, Anti-NRA

[Curmudgeon]

I don't do hypotheticals... they are like Big Foot... they aren't real... and a waste of time

 

Okay. It isn't hypothetical. It is the situation I am in. Does that help?

 

[nyantler]

You are correct about needing "thicker skin". And, calling out BS is one thing. Different values, and debates over whose science is better do not fall into the category of BS. Please let's not confuse legitimate differences of opinion with BS.

 

 

I think I am a bit more curious as to why this has become such a big issue for you... you're beating it to death... it is what it is and isn't going to change any time soon... accept it and learn how to live with it... you'll sleep much better.

[Curmudgeon]

I think I am a bit more curious as to why this has become such a big issue for you... you're beating it to death... it is what it is and isn't going to change any time soon... accept it and learn how to live with it... you'll sleep much better.

 

Maybe you are right. Maybe we should just call this a gun rights site and start a new hunting site - one that deals with conservation issues.

 

Edited December 17, 2014 by Curmudgeon

[Doc]

For nyantler, doc, culver and any others who can discern the subtleties of this issue, I have a request. Here is a hypothetical situation:

 

You have a new hunter - maybe a woman. This person did not grow up with firearms. They do not understand gun culture. They learn what they need to know at a course. They buy a gun as a tool to hunt. They have been exposed to main stream media their whole life. They are environmentally conscious, politically liberal and concerned about pure food.

 

Could someone explain to me how you would present the relationship between hunting and gun rights to this person? How do you convince them that gun rights is a compelling issue without scaring them, or, coming across as a zealot? How do you get them on your side?

Well, when it comes to the link between hunting and gun rights, I think a little dose of fear, reality, and awareness is a good thing. I think they need to become aware that there are those out there that are intent on removing all weapons from this country, and that they are indeed making great strides because of gun owner apathy. If that scares them, then good. It scares me too. If that sounds like the words of a zealot, so be it. Those that want hunting to extend beyond ourselves and into the future for our children and grand-children and beyond should be concerned about such things, and even a bit impassioned because it is obvious to anyone with a pulse, just where all this is heading.

 

And God forbid if they should happen to shoot this gun that they bought for hunting and actually enjoy the shooting part. They have just become hooked on an activity that will eventually get them labeled a zealot, and a "gun-nut". They will soon learn that even target shooting is shunned by the left because it still involves private ownership of that evil implement ..... the dreaded gun.

 

For some reason you threw in that these newcomers are typically politically liberal. I don't know why you made that assumption, but perhaps if that is the case, it needs to be pointed out to them just where all this gun-control nonsense is really coming from. It's not all that difficult to track down. Whether they can be convinced to join the pro-gun side of things is up to their open-mindedness and their willingness to accept what is, and always has been, right there in front of their face. If their political ideals serve as blinders, then they probably had better take up knitting because they never will get it until they find that they can't afford or get ammunition, or any guns to put it in when they decide that they want to go hunting.

[Doc]

Maybe you are right. Maybe we should just call this a gun rights site and start a new hunting site - one that deals with conservation issues.

 

This site is both. Since the link between guns and hunting is obvious, it would seem equally obvious that both are related themes.

[moog5050]

Curmudgeon

 

I believe the simple answer to your question is that the government's infringement on 2d amendment rights is a slippery slope.  Once it starts (and it has) there is no telling where it will end.  If you believe in and value that right, even if only for hunting purposes, then the right should be defended in total - not only when it impacts you or hunting.

[Five Seasons]

I have zero problem with him acting a fool if one can deal with the consequences of your own reputational hit. But, I have a concrete problem with him doing that and being very blatant about representing the NRA (passing out business cards even). I sent the group a letter explaining such and the guy still works there 5 years later in a rather high position. I can't put money into a group that sees value in someone of that mentality.

 

i had another response planned till i got to this last paragraph. I agree that there's nothing wrong with people who blow off steam at a wedding and drink to much. But just like some NFL players have found out recently, when you announce who you work for and what you do you are now representing that organization regardless if you're on the clock or not. I think the "salaries" and fat in organization like the NRA is what is concerning to members. The same criticism has been made to the red cross and a lot of churches where the pastor lives in a mansion.

[Five Seasons]

 

Internet bullying is a crime these days. So, yeah, you can be sued.

 

 

says the guy who has called me and a few other members some pretty choice words.

 

internet bullying... good lord never thought I'd see that statement on this site.

[jjb4900]

says the guy who has called me and a few other members some pretty choice words.

 

internet bullying... good lord never thought I'd see that statement on this site.

yeah, one of the funnier things I've seen posted the last few days.............but hey, some guys are very sensitive.

[genesee_mohican]

"

i had another response planned till i got to this last paragraph. I agree that there's nothing wrong with people who blow off steam at a wedding and drink to much. But just like some NFL players have found out recently, when you announce who you work for and what you do you are now representing that organization regardless if you're on the clock or not. I think the "salaries" and fat in organization like the NRA is what is concerning to members. The same criticism has been made to the red cross and a lot of churches where the pastor lives in a mansion."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So don't join the NRA because of that one or two stories of bad representation. Don't watch football because of the off field lives some live, don't go to church because somewhere a pastor has a mansion (I sure don't see that in the little towns around me, and I'm guessing that is true for 99% of pastors in the USA. )

 

  I guess my point is, the same others have made is this:   There are bad apples in every organization in life. The NRA is the main organization that fights for first amendment rights in our country.  If you don't want to join them but instead tell everyone on here how bad they are that is your right.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 17, 2014 by genesee_mohican

[jjb4900]

"

i had another response planned till i got to this last paragraph. I agree that there's nothing wrong with people who blow off steam at a wedding and drink to much. But just like some NFL players have found out recently, when you announce who you work for and what you do you are now representing that organization regardless if you're on the clock or not. I think the "salaries" and fat in organization like the NRA is what is concerning to members. The same criticism has been made to the red cross and a lot of churches where the pastor lives in a mansion."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So don't join the NRA because of that one or two stories of bad representation. Don't watch football because of the off field lives some live, don't go to church because somewhere a pastor has a mansion (I sure don't see that in the little towns around me, and I'm guessing that is true for 99% of pastors in the USA. )

 

  I guess my point is, the same others have made is this:   There are bad apples in every organization in life. The NRA is the main organization that fights for first amendment rights in our country.  If you don't want to join them but instead tell everyone on here how bad they are that is your right.

The NRA fights for the 1st Amendment rights??? I sure hope that was just a mistake.

[wildcat junkie]

Without the NRA, which has been around a long time, (100 years?) gun ownership in the USA would likely have been already outlawed. Most definitely it would be more restrictive than it already is.

 

However, their expertise is second amendment law / constitutional law. They should stick to that and stop talking about conservation because not only do they know nothing about conservation, they do not care about conservation, and very often advocate for UNWISE practices. They urge or suggest their members support their conservation perspective. Part of this is just the donation game. Create an enemy and the donations roll in. Anti hunting organizations do this as well. So do other pro hunting and pro gun organizations. For all they do to preserve gun ownership, the NRA works against conservation and good public relations.

 

And they are not always sensitive to other cultures. They stick their chin out and go out of their way not to be politically correct. There is a difference between standing with your viewpoint when it is not politically correct and going way out of your way  to "pick fights". Picking fights dumbs down their supporters and generates donations. With their attitude toward conservation AND habit of picking fights, they hurt the image of gun owners, hunters, and hunting.

 

Gun ownership is protected by the constitution. However there are few such protections for hunting. And hunter numbers will continue to drop if we have a bad image. The bigger the drop, the more aggressively and creatively will states and the FWS will look toward non hunters to fund their agencies. More emphasis will be put on developing, improving, and USING non lethal wildlife population control methods. The bad image will hinder the broad - based public support that is necessary to pass pro hunting legislation and defeat anti hunting legislation. Confusing hunters about conservation makes them support what they should not, oppose what they should support, or ignore what they should pay attention to. If all this corresponds to less hunting opportunity due to both greater restrictions and less places to hunt, and smaller game populations, then what? Even if hunting was afforded to be a legal right and therefore untouchable, how will conservation be funded if the number of us gets precipitously low? Would such a legal right prevent banning any thing, I don't think so. Where is the public support to block anti hunting proposals if we have a bad image? Likewise does a right to hunt guarantee that new pro hunting proposals will be put into law? No it does not. Where is the public support needed to enact pro hunting proposals if we have a bad image?  

Hey mike, great post. Since I'm no longer on their mailing list. I'm not aware of their stance on conservation that concerns you. Could you explain?

 

I would think that conservation would be in the Hunter's best interest, but of course there are differing concepts of conservation.

[Uncle Nicky]

I'm proud to say I belong to the NRA.

 

No, I don't send them anything beyond the $35, and I always make sure to get a $25 Bass Pro gift card when I re-up.

 

I don't put their sticker in my car window. I do consider their opinion when I vote, but in the end, I vote for who I believe best serves my interest. Ted Nugent is amusing and a great entertainer, but way over the top. I usually hang up when they call to sell me life insurance.

 

My point is, I don't buy everything they are selling. But I want to preserve the Second Amendment, and right now they are the best team for the job.

[Five Seasons]

Not everyone is progun, but to think independent's Democrat's don't own guns that's why I don't think party lines when thinking Gun control I view it your either with us or against us. I don't care what

organization you support, as long as its a Progun. So when I see people who support the same issue but fighting its the very thing the Gun Grabbers want, puts the brakes on the GUNS UP Movement. What scares them the most is the message Voters sent in NOV.

 

I know many "gun owners" who have a rifle and shotgun or 2. They could care less about pistols and assault rifles. These people I know are not anti-gun, but what bugs me about some of the lets call them "gun nuts" is the level they take it to and the will they impose upon those who don't believe it's appropriate to need a 30 round magazine in what is essentially a military rifle.

 

Personally I recognize and support the right to own these guns, but as an organization you have to be very careful you don't go over the deep end and sway those in the middle. Remember the idiots in Arizona walking through the store with ARs on their backs? It builds a stereotype that for some turns into a perception of reality. I think with hunting most americans do not mind us shooting deer and duck and turkey etc. But yes a tournament of killing crows or a bloody deer carcass strapped across the roof a civic can turn people off. Again, I'm not advocating taking away any rights, but some of the extremist on this board need to recognize that sometimes their crusades can go to far and turn people off.

[wildcat junkie]

I know many "gun owners" who have a rifle and shotgun or 2. They could care less about pistols and assault rifles. These people I know are not anti-gun, but what bugs me about some of the lets call them "gun nuts" is the level they take it to and the will they impose upon those who don't believe it's appropriate to need a 30 round magazine in what is essentially a military rifle.

 

Personally I recognize and support the right to own these guns, but as an organization you have to be very careful you don't go over the deep end and sway those in the middle. Remember the idiots in Arizona walking through the store with ARs on their backs? It builds a stereotype that for some turns into a perception of reality. I think with hunting most americans do not mind us shooting deer and duck and turkey etc. But yes a tournament of killing crows or a bloody deer carcass strapped across the roof a civic can turn people off. Again, I'm not advocating taking away any rights, but some of the extremist on this board need to recognize that sometimes their crusades can go to far and turn people off.

I think the current crop of "open carry" extremists are doing a huge disservice to gun owners.

 

I have the same opinion of Ted Nugent except he is making hunters look bad in the eyes of the public too.

[Curmudgeon]

internet bullying... good lord never thought I'd see that statement on this site.

 

What if we switch the word "bullying" with the word "abusing" Has anyone noticed that not one woman has participated in this discussion?

 

[wildcat junkie]

What if we switch the word "bullying" with the word "abusing" Has anyone noticed that not one woman has participated in this discussion?

 

No testosterone to vent?

[mmkay]

 

What if we switch the word "bullying" with the word "abusing" Has anyone noticed that not one woman has participated in this discussion?

I think there's at least one

[jjb4900]

What if we switch the word "bullying" with the word "abusing" Has anyone noticed that not one woman has participated in this discussion?

 

no difference...still has the same ring to it coming from a grown man on an anonymous message board.

[Huntscreek]

The 2nd Amendment! I stand with those who want pistols for open carry not because I want to do it because its their right, I stand for those who want 30 rounder's because its their right, I stand for them and they should respect my rights. When a person says I am progun BUT there is no BUT. The 2nd Amendment is what I go by not personal wants or needs, Its The People's Right to bare arms and anyone trying to change or reword it is against us, even those that own a gun but feel others should not have what they want to shoot. Exercise you 2nd Amendment right anyway you like because its your right to do so. There is no room for those that want to take away part or change part to suit them, My AR brothers/sisters & Single shotgun Brothers/sisters are all right with me. They are protect under the Constitution of the USA and any gun owner wanting to change any part of the 2nd should take long hard look at themselves & their beliefs. The 2nd Amendment how sweet it is, enable's you to hold onto all your others don't forget that.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Huntscreek

[Curmudgeon]

 

I think there's at least one

 

Sorry, your avatar looks like a man.

 

[mmkay]

 

The 2nd Amendment! I stand with those who want pistols for open carry not because I want to do it because its their right, I stand for those who want 30 rounder's because its their right, I stand for them and they should respect my rights. When a person says I am progun BUT there is no BUT. The 2nd Amendment is what I go by not personal wants or needs, Its The People's Right to bare arms and anyone trying to change or reword it is against us, even those that own a gun but feel others should not have what they want to shoot. Exercise you 2nd Amendment right anyway you like because its your right to do so. There is no room for those that want to take away part or change part to suit them, My AR brothers/sisters & Single shotgun Brothers/sisters are all right with me. They are protect under the Constitution of the USA and any gun owner wanting to change any part of the 2nd should take long hard look at themselves & their beliefs. The 2nd Amendment how sweet it is, enable's you to hold onto all your others don't forget that.

 

First they came for those owning pistols

And I did not speak out

Because I did not own a pistol

Then they came for those openly carrying a gun

And I did not speak out

Because I did not openly carry a gun

Then they came for those with high capacity clips

And I did not speak out

Because I owned nothing with a high capacity clips

Then they came for those owning scary looking guns (AR’s)

And I did not speak out

Because I had no scary looking guns (AR’s)

Then they came for my hunting rifle

And there was no one left

To speak out for me

[mmkay]

 

Sorry, your avatar looks like a man.

 

I wasn't speaking about myself. it was a cheap shot...sorry. but Damm it was funny...or at least to me it was

Edited December 17, 2014 by mmkay

[mmkay]

 

Edited December 17, 2014 by mmkay

[Mr VJP]

Seems some of us are really "Pro Politically Correct Guns, Anti Everything NRA.

 

Any wonder it's so easy for gun laws to pass in NY?