• ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info

No More Bump Stocks

Online, we gun owners are the majority of the people we know. Not just regular gun owners, but hardcore gun nuts that have huge gun collections, subscribe to gun magazines, read about guns all the time, constantly talk about gun control proposals, etc.

In real life, people like that are a tiny, tiny, minority of the population. Probably less than a million people in the entire country.

The NRA was founded as a mainstream organization. It was started by former Union Army officers who were dismayed that the city boys who were drafted or recruited to fight in the Civil War had no firearms skills. None. Marksmanship was a an alien concept to them. So, the NRA's first job was to promote rifle marksmanship among all the people SO THAT THEY WOULD MAKE BETTER SOLDIERS FOR THEIR GOVERNMENT when summoned to war.

The NRA didn't oppose the idea of banning machineguns and sawed-off shotguns and silencers in the 1930s. They just wanted to make sure the laws were written carefully so as not to end up banning regular semi-autos, or handguns, or guns that were too quiet naturally (like a .22 LR rifle with a 26" barrel loaded with standard velocity target ammo. That's as quiet as any gun with a silencer!)

The NRA saw the GUn Control Act of 1968 was going to pass, no matter what, so they worked to amend it to be minimally harmful to liberty. Private sales were unregulated. Sales from dealers got additional burdens and paperwork. There was no limit on how much ammo you could buy, but you'd have to show I.D. and the dealer would keep records on ammo sales, too (this lasted until 1986, when the NRA got ammo registration eliminated in exchange for "safe passage" interstate transport in your car trunk. The ban on new machineguns was part of that compromise, too. And the only reason you're allowed to order ammo online or through a catalog and have it shipped directly to your house is because that's part of the deal the NRA brokered on our behalf back in 1986.

The NRA is a mainstream organization of gun owners, target shooters, and hunters.
It was not meant to be a group of government-hating political extremists who think it's time to start a revolution if you can't have an unregistered machinegun, or can't buy handguns through vending machines at the airport terminal lobby, and aren't allowed to anonymously buy hand grenades at the local Army-Navy store for $9.99 each.

Instead of constantly complaining about the NRA's willingness to go along with some types of gun control, hardcore gun nuts really should just create and join some other no-compromise group that lobbies for (1) any weapon (2) carried or sold anywhere (3) by any person (4) anonymously and no questions asked. (meaning, no taxes, no licenses, no permits, no registration)

"“And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!” Barry Goldwater

As we study both history and law, we find there has been no real organization that was working on behalf of all gun owners. I'm willing to be part of an organization that would stand up for the Second Amendment.

The purpose of the Second Amendment did not create nor grant any new Right. It guaranteed the Right primarily for the security of a free state. Where people like you and I disagree is that those with a factual knowledge of history KNOW that the term unalienable Rights has a meaning. The way you worded what you said sounded demeaning to those who realize you're on the right path that we need to "create and join some other no-compromise group."

The reality is, the NRA nor any other gun group has lobbied for any of our Rights. The Right existed before the Constitution was penned - or so said the United States Supreme Court. Rather than admit that, you referred to those who are really concerned about the Second Amendment as extremists. That only works to scare people into believing that swill that you're doing something. Each of us has a Right, a Duty and a Responsibility to own a firearm and as someone else said: The greatest reason to retain the Right to keep and bear Arms is, as a last resort, to prevent tyranny in government."

We cannot insure the security of a free state when potential tyrants and dictators know everybody's business; we cannot fight a fight without the proper tools. So, you're for everybody having a registered semi-automatic weapon that Uncle Scam can confiscate the day the government moves just a tad too far for the sensibilities of those who enjoy Liberty and Freedom. I get it. It's just not what the Second Amendment is all about.

If you want to reduce crimes committed with firearms and keep them out of the wrong hands, try keeping the bodies connected to those wrong hands in jails, prisons, and, if they are mentally unstable - in protective custody like a mental institution. There is no excuse for attacking an UNALIENABLE Right, pretending that it is an act of political extremism when you, nor the government - or even I have the authority to negotiate it. Thank you for thinking the NRA protected my Rights, but by your own admission, they negotiated deals. They had no authority to do so as your Rights supersede man made laws. You could never give me what I already had.

We still have a duty to point out that the NRA endorsed a change in the law that was unconstitutional on THREE counts. And, FWIW, any time there is anyone who wants to meet and start working together to do what other gun "rights" groups should be doing, PM me. I'm all in.
 
FYI - I have tried to stay out of this thread/debate and let the lawyers run their course, but I will say this....this old hillbilly went to the woods and ripped about 160 rounds down range with the latest generation bump stock and it was a hoot! Call me a neckbeard, redneck-I could care less. It was a blast. Wasn't quite as fun as the dual 10/22 with the gatlin crank but it was actually controllable whether or not I wanted to do singles or a short burst, whatever. I have trained and fired many class 3 weapons and I would say with the slower rate of fire, the slidefire was actually better than at least half of the select fire weapons I have been exposed to - just a different technique. SO....for all you prima donnas that think I'm going to Hell for enjoying something that I traded for LEGALLY a year ago - pay your permission slip and enjoy your $15,000 M16 and leave me alone. I'm busy having fun!

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED:doh:
 
FYI - I have tried to stay out of this thread/debate and let the lawyers run their course, but I will say this....this old hillbilly went to the woods and ripped about 160 rounds down range with the latest generation bump stock and it was a hoot! Call me a neckbeard, redneck-I could care less. It was a blast. Wasn't quite as fun as the dual 10/22 with the gatlin crank but it was actually controllable whether or not I wanted to do singles or a short burst, whatever. I have trained and fired many class 3 weapons and I would say with the slower rate of fire, the slidefire was actually better than at least half of the select fire weapons I have been exposed to - just a different technique. SO....for all you prima donnas that think I'm going to Hell for enjoying something that I traded for LEGALLY a year ago - pay your permission slip and enjoy your $15,000 M16 and leave me alone. I'm busy having fun!

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED:doh:


Exactly !
 

The only thing Pratt is wrong about is whether or not Trump would allow gun control to pass. He will.

I wanted to thank you for this post because GOA advocates the same principle I do when it comes to strategy. If Universal Background Check legislation had to face both reciprocity AND a bill to make drugs the LAST treatment option adding in that patients must be in protective custody to be prescribed SSRIs, it would end gun control legislation. The entire premise is, they must give up something in order to get bipartisan support. If they don't give up something and negotiate, they lose a substantial part of their talking points.
 
The only thing Pratt is wrong about is whether or not Trump would allow gun control to pass. He will.

I wanted to thank you for this post because GOA advocates the same principle I do when it comes to strategy. If Universal Background Check legislation had to face both reciprocity AND a bill to make drugs the LAST treatment option adding in that patients must be in protective custody to be prescribed SSRIs, it would end gun control legislation. The entire premise is, they must give up something in order to get bipartisan support. If they don't give up something and negotiate, they lose a substantial part of their talking points.
No prob.

This is how the NRA should have been negotiating all along. Who gives up something and gets nothing in return? The NRA, that's who.
 
Back
Top Bottom