"it's time for hunters to leave the NRA"

[Biff Tannen 45500]

1 minute ago, UpperWestside said:

Let me help you here. It’s the fear of black and brown people. Gotta have the full arsenal ready for the coming race war.

For some, sure, but I don't think this is the majority.  I don't even think they know why anymore.  It's just ingrained as part of their being and it makes no god damn sense.

[WhatTheBuck 28716]

12 minutes ago, Goredho said:

These are reasonable assumptions that will apply to many.  They do not apply the two people I am referencing who are members of my family that I know extremely well.  If I had to guess, they will still vote democrat and are having a knee jerk reaction to the headlines.

They'll still be on the mailing list. The gun industry will still have an advocacy/lobbying group, whether the NRA or someone else, to perform the same function. This won't affect their right to own guns. It won't affect them in any way. If they're paying members of the NRA, ask them if they're comfortable with Wayne LaPierre spending their dues on thousand dollar suits and a 17 million dollar retirement account for hself. Except don't call him Wayne LaPierre. Call him "Frenchy."

[triplehorn 2664]

4 hours ago, StassneyHorn said:

Hit the message on fraud and how execs are getting rich taking advantage of smaller guys, and it will reinforce those who are already skeptical of this administration and everything else they touch. Don’t let the other side make it about guns, make it about corruption.

NYAG highlights the self-dealing, but wait until the forensic money trail gets laid out.  Where did all the money flowing into the NRA come from and where else did it go?  

This has been cooking for a good while (from Sept. 2019): NPR: NRA Was 'Foreign Asset' To Russia Ahead of 2016, New Senate Report Reveals

"Attorneys general in the state of New York and the District of Columbia are conducting separate probes into alleged wrongdoing at the gun rights organization. These probes have a broader scope than the Senate report, which focuses on Russia."

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Armybrat 40748]

5 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

So much this.  

 

The Armybrat's of the world were gonna show up for Trump anyway.   They are single-issue voters, and nothing is more important to them than their guns. 

Excuse me, but kindly fuck off with calling me out and projecting bullshit. You don’t know me, so knock that crap off.  Some other assholes have done the same thing in the CR. I didn't vote for him and will not.
I have met La Pierre twice years ago, which confirmed my opinion that he’s a sleazebag and needed to go. I was a Neal Knox supporter back in the day.

 

[VRHorn 718]

5 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

Excuse me, but kindly fuck off with calling me out and projecting bullshit. You don’t know me, so knock that crap off.  Some other assholes have done the same thing in the CR. I didn't vote for him and will not.
I have met La Pierre twice years ago, which confirmed my opinion that he’s a sleazebag and needed to go. I was a Neal Knox supporter back in the day.

 

In fairness, the other guys "@" you so you got a notification. @Gil Bang didn't do that, so you were pretty clearly reading the thread looking to be offended.

Just thought I would point that out.

[triplehorn 2664]

[...] The congressional probe into the National Rifle Association’s relationship with Russia shows a U.S. tax-exempt organization working as a conduit to provide Russian officials access to Republicans with the quid pro quo of “lucrative personal business opportunities. [...]” 

oh.

and just a friendly reminder that Barr-as-fixer can't fire or quash the NYAG in this matter.

 

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, UpperWestside said:

Let me help you here. It’s the fear of black and brown people. Gotta have the full arsenal ready for the coming race war.

the little soy boy and girl rioters tend to be pigmentation averse.

Keep playing that race card though...  it sounds great.

[Prepuce of Doom 20991]

2 minutes ago, slorch said:

the little soy boy and girl rioters tend to be pigmentation averse.

Keep playing that race card though...  it sounds great.

Anyone who says "pigmentation averse" (whatever the fuck that means - or is intended to convey) has no room to cast aspersions about "playing the race card." 

[UpperWestside 6136]

10 minutes ago, slorch said:

the little soy boy and girl rioters tend to be pigmentation averse.

Keep playing that race card though...  it sounds great.

Keep being the racist clown that you have always been. It fits you. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

Keep being the racist clown that you have always been. It fits you. 

we disagree on something, so that makes me a racist in your eyes?

Go fuck yourself.  And, yes, you're wrong on multiple fronts.

[StassneyHorn 6540]

Slorch making a happy hour post

Edited August 6, 2020 by StassneyHorn

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, Prepuce of Doom said:

Anyone who says "pigmentation averse" (whatever the fuck that means - or is intended to convey) has no room to cast aspersions about "playing the race card." 

It was intentional, to address the already idiotic assertion by another poster.  The scorekeepers like Westside like it.

 

 

Edited August 6, 2020 by slorch

[UpperWestside 6136]

8 minutes ago, StassneyHorn said:

Slorch making a happy hour post

He stopped picking up bootstraps for awhile to come and bless us all with some drunk and racist posts. 

Edited August 6, 2020 by UpperWestside

[hayden_horn 11360]

32 minutes ago, Prepuce of Doom said:

Anyone who says "pigmentation averse" (whatever the fuck that means - or is intended to convey) has no room to cast aspersions about "playing the race card." 

i don't even mind that as much as "soy boy." that's the ultimate in triggered little snowflake bullshit.

[Bozo_Casanova 26296]

3 hours ago, kevwun said:

"The Democrats forced me to vote for Trump because of this" people were always going to vote for Trump.  It is one of the bigger crocks of shit about this voters.  They're always going to find that excuse.  It's how they rationalize voting for him.

 

3 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I question their sincerity. 

You guys can say that, but what's it worth? Maybe 1-2% of the vote? In some places that could be determinative. And I'll go further: being anti-gun is not really a core part of the Democratic voter coalition, which is mostly economic. I would argue that the framing of gun control as an issue hurts Democrats far more than it helps them.

[GopherRock 1765]

3 hours ago, The Royal We said:

Obama didn't take away the guns, but Biden is going to do it this time, honest!  You're gullible af if you fall for that bs.

Bill Clinton was going to take your guns, too.

[Prepuce of Doom 20991]

52 minutes ago, slorch said:

It was intentional, to address the already idiotic assertion by another poster.  The scorekeepers like Westside like it.

 

 

Fair enough - I haven't read the entirety of this thread. Was just stopping by to see how today's news stimulated discussion and couldn't get over the absurdity. Looks like we're in agreement about that much... 

[The Royal We 3066]

56 minutes ago, GopherRock said:

Bill Clinton was going to take your guns, too.

Great point. I can remember my dad bitching about this when I was a kid. 

[fattyflattie 4636]

3 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

If they're paying members of the NRA, ask them if they're comfortable with Wayne LaPierre spending their dues on thousand dollar suits and a 17 million dollar retirement account for hself.

I’m not comfortable spending my money on 10k suits. 
 

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

being anti-gun is not really a core part of the Democratic voter coalition, which is mostly economic.

That’s because fuckloads of Americans own guns. Truly a #bothsides deal. There are obviously differences in the details, but as far as absolute ownership, both sides. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, hayden_horn said:

i don't even mind that as much as "soy boy." that's the ultimate in triggered little snowflake bullshit.

white boys who still live at home.

better?

They're pathetic excuses for human beings, either way.  Y'all tend to love em.

Edited August 7, 2020 by slorch

[StassneyHorn 6540]

Mix in a water every now and then

[Bozo_Casanova 26296]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

I’m not comfortable spending my money on 10k suits. 
 

That’s because fuckloads of Americans own guns. Truly a #bothsides deal. There are obviously differences in the details, but as far as absolute ownership, both sides. 

Damn right. 

[immortal13 4059]

5 hours ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

I can't wait to apply for the position of gun confiscator in Biden's God hating administration. I'll be sporting a huge boner as I rip guns from people's hands. Nobody wants to rape you old man, now gimme that gun! 

You'll get your ass kicked on the first day

[Francisco 2.0 32346]

Ole Wayne's grifting was quite impressive:

 

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1291537690635239425.html

 

 

Edited August 7, 2020 by Francisco 2.0

[Doc Sam Beckett 5784]

8 minutes ago, immortal13 said:

You'll get your ass kicked on the first day

It would be pretty humiliating to get my ass kicked and not shot if I'm trying to confiscate guns 

[hayden_horn 11360]

1 hour ago, slorch said:

white boys who still live at home.

better?

They're pathetic excuses for human beings, either way.  Y'all tend to love em.

the fuck are you talking about? 

[Gil Bang 25899]

the little soy boy and girl rioters tend to be pigmentation averse.
Keep playing that race card though...  it sounds great.

Says the guy that choreographed a starsky and hutch routine for he and his teenage son, in the event of a home invasion.

[Guest]

Just now, Gil Bang said:

Says the guy that choreographed a starsky and hutch routine for he and his teenage son, in the event of a home invasion.

Have no idea what the fuck you're talking about.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

the fuck are you talking about? 

The people you make excuses for.

 

You fucking know.  celebrate disruption.  They're protesters.

Edited August 7, 2020 by slorch

[Gil Bang 25899]

You discussed it at length on TOS. You and your kid worked out a who-does-what in the event of home invasion. I goofed on you then, and I’m still doing so.

[hayden_horn 11360]

1 minute ago, slorch said:

The people you make excuses for.

 

You fucking know.

i actually don't. can you please tell me for whom i am making excuses? 

also, define soy boy, please 

Edited August 7, 2020 by hayden_horn

[Guest]

lolz.  Now nobody knows shit.

 

I'll give you credit for not claiming racism where it doesn't exist.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

You discussed it at length on TOS. You and your kid worked out a who-does-what in the event of home invasion. I goofed on you then, and I’m still doing so.

Either I was completely drunk, or you are misremembereing me as someone else.   I do not recall that discussion at all.

I don't worry about home invasion.  I've never discussed scenarios with either of my sons. They never had access to my firearms.  Entire discussion does not compute.

Edited August 7, 2020 by slorch

[ChiTownDoc 21102]

I was all like, "I bet the CR gun thread is a total fucking shitshow right now".  

I am not disappoint. 

[tx 3 putt 76420]

burn it down !!!!!

[washparkhorn 9935]

7 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 

You guys can say that, but what's it worth? Maybe 1-2% of the vote? In some places that could be determinative. And I'll go further: being anti-gun is not really a core part of the Democratic voter coalition, which is mostly economic. I would argue that the framing of gun control as an issue hurts Democrats far more than it helps them.

Agree. It energizes some to actually get out and vote against Democrats. 

[Biff Tannen 45500]

4 hours ago, slorch said:

Either I was completely drunk, or you are misremembereing me as someone else.   I do not recall that discussion at all.

I don't worry about home invasion.  I've never discussed scenarios with either of my sons. They never had access to my firearms.  Entire discussion does not compute.

So why do you need guns again?  If it’s just hunting, well that’s an infantile need, but ok. 

[RPM 26231]

I'm a Democrat. I own lots of guns. I said fuck the NRA in the 90's.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

So why do you need guns again?  If it’s just hunting, well that’s an infantile need, but ok. 

why do you need to talk?  and who the fuck are you to assess my needs of liberty?  Are you the comptroller of who gets what and how much?

 

I said I don't worry about home invasion.  There's a big difference between saying that and not being prepared for it.  I'm not a believer in liberty providing others free access to my stuff.  I mean it's insured, but so are the lives of the folks who call it home.   Have at it, right?

Edited August 7, 2020 by slorch

[Bozo_Casanova 26296]

4 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

So why do you need guns again?  If it’s just hunting, well that’s an infantile need, but ok. 

Can’t speak for anyone else, but I don’t hunt. I keep guns for a three reasons:

1) I think they are inherently interesting

2) I enjoy shooting

3) In the unlikely event that I need to take up arms against tyranny or protect my family from a collapse of civil order.

[TwiceHorn 31304]

19 hours ago, UpperWestside said:

 Other than it being where the organization was first formed and where some of its earliest events took place around a 150 years ago I don't have much to offer here. 

Yeah, I'd guess it wasn't exactly a bunch of sophisticates that put it together.  And. Delaware didn't start the "race to the bottom" until the 20th century.

But it is rather surprising that it didn't move to Delaware at some point.

[gmr548 16518]

i don't even mind that as much as "soy boy." that's the ultimate in triggered little snowflake bullshit.

Therev are few stronger indicators of a sub-room temp IQ and rampant insecurity than use of that phrase. Then again, look who used it.

You guys can say that, but what's it worth? Maybe 1-2% of the vote? In some places that could be determinative. And I'll go further: being anti-gun is not really a core part of the Democratic voter coalition, which is mostly economic. I would argue that the framing of gun control as an issue hurts Democrats far more than it helps them.

I'm not sure about that only because there isn't a core Democratic message on guns. Some Ds just want to play it safe and do the things the vast majority of the public supports. Some want to go further. If they had congress they'd probably fail on gun control the way the GOP did on healthcare

I do think that'll change over time as boomers and Xers fade out. Mellenials and gen z have grown up in a world where mass shootings are normal. They're much more supportive of strict gun control and things like buybacks. The complete refusal of any action to stop these school shooting and other mass shooting events is going to lead to a much harsher crackdown on guns a few decades from now. The hardliner gun rights voters don't recognize it, but they've absolutely doomed the future of their cause.

Personally, I'm not a gun guy at all but I don't see a whole lot that can be done about it at this point. If I ran the Democratic Party for the day I'd very publicly offer to drop guns in exchange for the GOP dropping attacks on abortion/women's health.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

Therev are few stronger indicators of a sub-room temp IQ and rampant insecurity than use of that phrase. Then again, look who used it.I'm not sure about that only because there 

That's who the looters and rioters generally are.  Sorry if reality  bothers you.

 

Oh yeah, we're talking politics, where everything in the real world happens like your discussions on campus/ in the Starbucks occurred.

 

Bonus points for the IQ shot when you have nothing else substantive to say.  just follow your flow chart of responses, bro.

Edited August 7, 2020 by slorch

[TwiceHorn 31304]

24 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Can’t speak for anyone else, but I don’t hunt. I keep guns for a three reasons:

1) I think they are inherently interesting

2) I enjoy shooting

3) In the unlikely event that I need to take up arms against tyranny or protect my family from a collapse of civil order.

Pro-tip.  

Airguns satisfy all but 3, and some you can shoot in your back yard.

I enjoy shooting and agree that guns are interesting machines.  But I don't hunt anymore, I just target shoot and plink.  The cost of ammo and shooting ranges (i.e. clays) deters me quite a bit.  I don't really have access to land like I used to, but that may be changing as friends empty their nests.

[Guest]

wait... so the powder is the threat?

 

LOlz.

[Dnaguy 11777]

40 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Can’t speak for anyone else, but I don’t hunt. I keep guns for a three reasons:

1) I think they are inherently interesting

2) I enjoy shooting

3) In the unlikely event that I need to take up arms against tyranny or protect my family from a collapse of civil order.

 FIFY. I agree in large part in your other points.

But, guns do not stop government tyranny.

That shit is going to happen regardless of whether the populous is armed. The power dynamic, resources, and technological advantage of our federal / state governments vs. common citizenry is so skewed that arming people with semi-automatic weapons does nothing to prevent abuses of power.

What guns are great at is killing people/things.

And when a populous is heavily armed and it’s difficult to vet those who have them , know how many are out there, and prevent illegal sales then we get into a situation where a lot of people end up dead.

Far more people are dead at the hands of the instruments that’s supposed to protect against gov. Tyranny. And when you look at the total # of those dead, it’s likely that it’s FAR more than what a tyrannical government could achieve (well... maybe / maybe not. But stay with me)

I think that’s the biggest irony in my mind.

The 2nd amendment and what it has become / what it has been interpreted to guarantee has created a far more tyrannical situation to the common person currently than what it was supposed to protect us from.

Edited August 7, 2020 by Dnaguy

[gmr548 16518]

That's who the looters and rioters generally are.  Sorry if reality  bothers you.
 
Oh yeah, we're talking politics, where everything in the real world happens like your discussions on campus/ in the Starbucks occurred.
 
Bonus points for the IQ shot when you have nothing else substantive to say.  just follow your flow chart of responses, bro.

Lol. Yes I'm so triggered and bothered. What the consensus dumbest poster on the site said really offended me, I definitely wasn't just pointing out that you're a profoundly stupid human being and should be handled as such.

Carry on, alpha male king.

[TwiceHorn 31304]

2 minutes ago, slorch said:

wait... so the powder is the threat?

 

LOlz.

No, but by using airguns to satisfy my shooting itch, I almost completely remove myself from the gun-rights fray while remaining a fairly avid shooter.  Airguns remain legal even in countries with strict gun control laws, i.e. Europe.

I still own half a dozen firearms, but they get shot even less now.

[Biff Tannen 45500]

5 hours ago, slorch said:

why do you need to talk?  and who the fuck are you to assess my needs of liberty?  Are you the comptroller of who gets what and how much?

 

I said I don't worry about home invasion.  There's a big difference between saying that and not being prepared for it.  I'm not a believer in liberty providing others free access to my stuff.  I mean it's insured, but so are the lives of the folks who call it home.   Have at it, right?

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

12 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

 But, guns do not stop government tyranny.

That shit is going to happen regardless of whether the populous is armed. The power dynamic, resources, and technological advantage of our federal / state governments vs. common citizenry is so skewed that arming people with semi-automatic weapons does nothing to prevent abuses of power.

I clipped this part out, because in light of the AG, this is what is ultimately going on, IMO. The influence that the organization used, under the guise of "GUNS," was to funnel money not only to the leadership of the organization, but to the very abuse of power of which you speak. Another org will pop up in its place, but going after the obvious fraud is at least, at start.