Comments: Yet more on the NRA & Bush

Some excellent comments, and I thank you for posting.

I too have pondered the absolutist vs. pragmatic approach, and nothing I'd like better than to have our right to keep & bear arms to be just that-- a right. But how best to achieve that goal?

For my part, I'm a Life Member of both the NRA and GOA. I didn't want to spend the money to get life membership, but in the NRA that means I have a vote. Which means I can at least try to influence the leadership towards the "no compromise" end of the spectrum.

I agree with you that all too often the NRA proposes laws that are not in keeping with the 2nd Amendment, and I'm particularly concerned with legislation that is "sensible" such as registering guns that people buy. I've spent much of the last 30 years in Australia and watched helplessly as "sensible" laws such as these resulted in long lists of guns to be handed over to the gov't by means of "buybacks." The end result is a completely disarmed public and a tremendous rise in crime, esp. hot burglaries and assaults.

Now the gov't there is banning swords.

Australians have a saying, "The thin edge of the wedge." Means that once you start compromising, you compromise a bit more, then a bit more yet, until finally you have lost the lot.

Much better to not start compromising at all.

But as you point out, our "thin edge of the wedge" was way back in 1934 (or maybe even earlier, but that's a date to remember) and since then we've lost a lot of ground. And much of our population is now urban and have lost the acceptance of gun use that their grandparents probably had. People are scared of what they don't understand, and media depends on selling their wares by frightening people; an easy step from there to "ban guns, then no one gets shot."

Just not true, but we can't depend on the media to tell the truth, can we. Not about guns, nor about politics.

I hope it doesn't come to this-- but the only thing that I can see happening, which MAY get us back to public acceptance of RKBA, is for another terrorist attack on our home soil to occur. That just might jolt the bliss-ninnys into awareness that defending themselves is THEIR responsibility, not gov't or police.

But even that may not do it. Remember the LA riots, where the only shops that weren't looted & burned were the ones defended by their owners, who carried rifles? What response did that get from the duly elected California State Gov't? Well, they passed laws banning the 'assault' rifles, didn't they. After all, can't have We the People defending themselves and their property, can we.

So I try not to be discouraged, and will continue to fight for the restoration of our rights, but it's going to be a long, hard fight with very little light showing at the end of the long dark tunnel. And I'll continue to keep trying to get more people involved with both the NRA and GOA; maybe once we get to a "tipping point" things will start going the other way.

Molon labe

Posted by R. Denis Wauchope at April 29, 2004 10:20 PM

This is in re. to the hobbeson or whatever guy's response to the above, on the compromising NRA. I didn't see an easy way to respond to him on his site so here it is. Someone please make sure he sees this. I'm happily awaiting his excuses.

I'm one of those "absolutists" I suppose since few of the sheeple have the balls to regularly visit my website.

from his comments:

"but still a relatively long way from the prohibition end of things."

That would be the end? No. Not by a long shot, in fact not by several long shots.

That's what's wrong with the NRA and the Republicrats, they are too cowardly to say publicly what needs to happen to the lowlife pieces of shit who espouse disarming the civilian population.

And don't give me the whine that the sheeple would be "turned off" by such a message. If they allow themselves to be disarmed they deserve what follows.

We are at war in this country, have been for 150 years since the German socialists came over. Everything, that's the 'everything' in the dictionary, not the "Liberal" 'everything' that might leave a few inconvenient things out, they do and say is propaganda to further their goals. End of discussion. The ones at the top are not misled idiots. They are highly intelligent and evil. One does not have to be a "conspiracy theorist" of some sort to understand this. That includes the Sarah Bradys of the world.

If only a minority fights prohibition, then they eventually die. If there is no fight at prohibition and someday the scumbags decide they've got too many sheeple and start shooting them into ditches then there will be even a tinier minority with the means and guts to fight.

What the sheeple tolerate they deserve. That is the bottom line.

For more on what I think of the NRA, which I quit in 94 when I heard Tanya Metaska or whatever say at a meeting that they give money to the politician they think is best, (or usually think can win from what I can tell as I’ve heard many instances of them ignoring people in various states who tried to point out to them who the real 'best' candidate was) and if their choice loses they go and offer money to the piece of shit who did lie his way in - that's all I needed to hear - go to my FAQ page:

If another generation is lost to the govt. school indoctrination system, there won't be enough voters left to keep the Demoncrats and Republicrats out of office. Of course I won't be here by then anyway.

I'd rather be the lone nut who realizes he's on a sinking ship than on the bail squad the captain created to keep people busy.


Posted by Barry Bright at May 1, 2004 01:48 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?