The response to Sandy Hook - schools should have armed guards
Okay well first off you got that wrong. What the NRA actually said was that they would like to see more School Resources Officers (Police Officers to you and I) in schools but that was deemed too expensive by the powers that be. A lot of schools here have DARE Officers(Drug Abuse Resistance Education) on campus. The NRA never advocated armed security guards or armed teachers in schools. The people who did that are an organization who go by the name of Gun Owners of America and who view the NRA as wimps. The GOA has a membership of around 300,000 compared to the NRA's 4.2 million and are considered unreasonable by the majority of gun owners in this country.
The NRA also proposed better surveillance, better school bus routing, and better obvious measures like providing more securable windows and doors. Again the powers that be said it would be too costly. Kind of stinks when the government will send billions abroad but baulks at spending money to protect it's own children.
Suggesting the way to stop aircraft jacking was passengers should be able to carry their guns on board! - never heard of negligent discharge & differential pressure at 30,00 feet hu?
Huh!!!! Again the NRA said no such thing. What it actually said last year was that all the different airlines in the US have different rules for the safe transporting of firearms and that it would like to see a set of uniform rules that apply across the board. Of course the New York Times (very anti gun) picked up on it and put out the story that the NRA wanted passengers to carry guns on board airlines. They later retracted that story after the NRA proved that is not what was said, that and the legal action that followed which the NRA dropped after the retraction.
Opposing a requirement to report stolen firearms within 48hrs (its immediate here!) er is that not commonsense?
Yep that's right they did do that, and the reason they did that is? Well here's the full scoop for you, It was the State of Delaware that was going to introduce that law. The problem with that law was/is if a gun was stolen and the owner wasn't aware of it, say away on holiday and the gun was used in a crime, then the owner regardless of whether they knew it was stolen or not is guilty of the crime of not notifying the Police of a stolen firearm within 48 hours. It wouldn't matter if the guns were in a safe or not and if the safe was forced open, the gun owner was now the criminal. That change is now being challenged in the courts by the NRA.
Now then as far as the law is concerned in the majority of States over here a gun theft must be reported as soon as the owner becomes aware of it, that was also the case in Delaware, so why would they change it to 48 hours? Wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that Delaware is also an East Coast liberal anti gun State, could it? Nawwwww surely not.
Opposing the most basic of background checks on applicants to purchase a firearm. ditto above?
We already have background checks but just for you I'll explain the process. Now then if I want to buy a rile in a shop before I take that rifle out of the shop two things happen, first I have to fill out ATF form 4473, when that's done the guy behind the counter takes my State ID and the ATF form 4473 then calls the FBI's National Instant Checks System (NICS) who carry out a criminal background check. If there is no problem then the gun is mine, if there is a problem or the check is put on hold for further investigation the gun doesn't leave the shop until it's been cleared by NICS. That can take a couple of days and they will say proceed or denied, if it's denied then the rifle doesn't leave the shop
For pistols it's slightly different. To buy a pistol I would first need to go along to the Sheriffs Department and after having prints taken get a Permit to Purchase a Pistol, the Sheriff runs a quick check with the State Police for criminal records before issuing the permit. If all is well the permit is issued and I would go off and present my permit to the gun shop owner, pick my pistol, fill out ATF form 4473, still have it checked with the NICS and if they're good pay for my pistol and take it home.
The permission to purchase permit is in four sections. One section is kept by the shop, one is kept by me, and the other two are returned to the Sheriffs department within 10 days, they then send one copy to the State Police.
The process is slightly different for a holder of a concealed pistol licence, they still fill out ATF form 4473 but it is not called into NICS because despite what you may have heard, there are a lot of legal hoops to jump through to get a CPL and holders of a CPL are considered law abiding and trustworthy. Any offence committed by a CPL holder means instant revocation of the CPL if found guilty of the offence. Speeding and parking tickets don't count.
With regards to privately transferring a firearms, well put it this way. I recently transferred a pistol to my son, he still had to get the permission to purchase, have a background check done to get the permit and as the current owner I had to fill it out to transfer the gun. Private sales of rifles are different, no background check required though saying that everyone I know who sells a rifle to a stranger will insist it goes through a Federal Firearms Licensee and ATF form 4473 is filled out, you would have to be crazy not to insist on it and most people do. Anyone who doesn't is a complete idiot and deserves all they get should things go belly up.
The NRA has never opposed these background checks, if anything it agreed for once with the anti gun Brady Bunch that mental health checks be included as well. It wasn't the NRA who objected to it, it was the American Civil Rights Union (ACRU) another anti gun crowd who disagreed citing it was an infringement on peoples rights. Hey go figure, I guess having the NRA agree didn't suit their agenda.
The open carry fiasco in Walmart & other shops that even the NRA Management seem to be now distancing its self from.
Well you wrote it yourself, the NRA is distancing itself because this is a decision taken by private companies to not allow open carry in their shops, their shops their rules. It is also GOA members who are shouting about it and not NRA members, nothing to do with the NRA pal.
People with mental issues & problems should not be allowed 'out' because they might get guns & do bad s***? - NRA president?
Could you please supply a link for this because I live here and I've heard or read nothing on this. It would be interesting to know the source because well quite frankly the antis are saying that the NRA says all nutters should have guns.
Sponsoring things like the hunting show where creatures so rare as soon to be extinct (Elephants etc) are hunted for self gratification & fun on TV & of course $$$.
Which hunting show is that? and who else sponsors it. I put it to you that if an animal such as the elephant is endangered then it is not through the actions of legal hunting but as a result of the actions of poachers which no one condones let alone the NRA. You sound just like the antis, forget where the real blame lays for the endangerment of animal species.
Arms industry funding
Hmmm you're going to have to expand on that one a wee bit, are you saying the NRA funds the firearms manufacturers or the other way around?
& this single issue obsession & focus on the 2nd amendment & the right to bear arms etc
It's the law dude, written into the Constitution of The United States of America, get over it. There are politicians here who would quite happily trample over the laws of the land to suit their own needs and agendas, The Second Amendment ensures they never get the chance to do that and if you think it doesn't or can't happen then just look to your own to see what I mean.
I am well aware there are many real enthusiasts & sportsmen/women in the org who do good things: Re training, organising, competitions etc. & no offense is intended to them & their efforts - But their voice is not heard over the loud n proud bullshit from the likes of Charlton Heston?
You have absolutely no idea what you are writing about on this, The membership of the NRA is made up of law abiding firearm owners and if it ever got to a point where the NRA didn't listen to it's membership, they wouldn't be around long and they certainly wouldn't have a membership of millions.
P.S. Charlton Heston is dead.
To be honest if the NRA of GB became anything like that of NRA USA in the public eye, first the membership will voice up & if it didn't change I think I & many many others would just quit.
In your opinion maybe, I think North of Watford that could be a matter of some debate.
I constantly get UK people interested in shooting asking if our club has anything to do with the NRA of USA & believe me it is with a definitive negative slant! Its a damned negative image to my clubs efforts to recruit enthusiasts, sports men & women. Especially from parents of scouts & jnrs. The NRA of USA publicity machine does not help me & our quest.
What a load of horse manure, lets face it mate the majority of the people in the UK haven't a clue about the UK NRA let alone the US NRA. Hey why not just fess up and admit you just don't like the US NRA because of the stories you heard or read put out by the antis and the media here and over there and that while the US NRA supports all forms of shooting some of those forms just don't fit in with your purist form or whatever it is type of shooting. For someone who claims they aren't a "sheeple" you sure do read, listen to, and believe some crap.
Target rifle & the NRA of G,B CSR & gallery rifle have nothing to do with the right to bear arms, they are marketable, wholesome sporting & competitive activity & we should stand up & be proud of what we do in & with them.
Tell me Phil, did you have Vera Lynn playing in the background as you wrote that? :roll: And of course those tools that you use for your "wholesome shooting", none of them or their components are made in the US are they? They are all made in the UK and Europe? You friend have got no idea idea about the sport here in the US. Most US States have more target ranges for competitive shooting in their own States than you have in the entire United Kingdom, you really have no clue. You just read and believe all the nonsense put in front of you because it's America so it must be true tesnews
I saved this one for last because it was the one that made me laugh the longest.
the rights of citizens to hold assault weapons as items for recreational fun
I am the proud owner of three AR15's of varying calibres which I use for target shooting (shock horror they do target shooting there) and I also use for hunting. I do not own any assault weapons of any kind and to date none of my firearms have been used to assault any person and neither have the firearms of the millions of law abiding people here.
So tell me, how do you feel about the .50 GB team that recently competed over here in the US? Target rifle with an assault weapon as used by the armed forces of many countries, or is that okay with you because they aren't Americans.
P.S. Don't knock it until you try it old son, they are great fun to shoot both competitively and recreationally.
Here's the difference between you and I Phil, I support of forms of legal shooting regardless of type of firearm. You on the other hand have decided that only certain firearms should be used for "wholesome" true shooting and that folks don't need or shouldn't have any other kind. You Phil are a big part of the problem, guys like you mate speed the demise of the sport with your holier than thou Bullsh!t.
Have a nice day now y'all
Blu :roll:
