Gun Control Reform Activism

billh58

(6,642 posts)

14. No, there is absolutely no merit to

Wed Apr 23, 2014, 04:50 PM

Apr 2014

this "idea." Your opening statement gives the whole thing away: "The right to bear arms is a basic right..." This is the right-wing interpretation of the Second Amendment as upheld by the neoconservative Gang of Five on the SCOTUS which overturned long-standing reasonable interpretations by previous Justices, and is yet again subject to change.

It is a right which can, should be, and is, regulated for the benefit of the general public. The actual "bearing arms" part of the Second Amendment is subject to further regulation as to where, why, and when.

Nationalizing the NRA would be tantamount to calling the armed neo-Nazi militias in this country to active duty and expecting them to not only obey the orders, but to give up their intentions to overthrow the Federal Government and its black president.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why doesn't the government start a new department to compete with the private NRA????? [View all] Pauldg47 Apr 2014 OP

Because the NRA lobbies Congress to make sure it is the only voice of the gun nuts liberal N proud Apr 2014 #1

Couldn't liberals lobby too. Or could it be done by executive order?.... Pauldg47 Apr 2014 #9

Do you know of a liberal organization with the money the NRA has? liberal N proud Apr 2014 #20

Maybe the National Education Association ...... Pauldg47 Apr 2014 #29

Money = speech liberal N proud Apr 2014 #33

Not a bad idea. But, gun fanciers will say if agency heads don't know difference between a clip and Hoyt Apr 2014 #2

Maybe if it were run by responsible people bearing arms..... Pauldg47 Apr 2014 #3

I'm not sure what "responsible people bearing arms" means, at least nowadays. Hoyt Apr 2014 #5

Don't think it would make any difference Still Sensible Apr 2014 #4

Can the President get this going on his own like Bush creating the homeland Security? Pauldg47 Apr 2014 #6

Technically, Bush didn't "create" DHS or the cabinet position. Calista241 May 2014 #35

Pardon but... discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2014 #36

You are correct and I feel like an idiot. N/t Calista241 May 2014 #37

Don't sweat it. We've all made mistakes. discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2014 #38

Guns aren't allowed in schools now. SevenSixtyTwo Apr 2014 #7

I don't SevenSixtyTwo Apr 2014 #8

It's just an idea that has merit. Start up for other entities such as social security... Pauldg47 Apr 2014 #10

Wouldn't the SevenSixtyTwo Apr 2014 #13

What is the batf. Pauldg47 Apr 2014 #15

Bureau of Alcohol SevenSixtyTwo Apr 2014 #21

Criminals wouldn't get guns so easily if gun fanciers weren't so careless with their guns, or so Hoyt Apr 2014 #11

I agree SevenSixtyTwo Apr 2014 #12

No, there is absolutely no merit to billh58 Apr 2014 #14

I didn't say nationalizing the NRA....... Pauldg47 Apr 2014 #16

Let me get this straight. billh58 Apr 2014 #18

No that's not what I'm driving at..... Pauldg47 Apr 2014 #24

Again, you are posting in billh58 Apr 2014 #25

Take a political science class Bubba! Pauldg47 Apr 2014 #27

Also, not every member in the NRA is radical and do not like where they're at. Pauldg47 Apr 2014 #17

If NRA members were not billh58 Apr 2014 #19

You'd be surprised how many Fudds SevenSixtyTwo Apr 2014 #22

Shhhhh... billh58 Apr 2014 #23

There are many Democrats who hunt...... Pauldg47 Apr 2014 #26

Well any true Democrat in NRA ought to look at their right wing policies, Hoyt Apr 2014 #28

Fifty years ago the NRA was not this radical. Pauldg47 Apr 2014 #30

This isn't 50 years ago and gunz today, and the people who covet them, are more dangerous. Hoyt Apr 2014 #32

Another NRA cheerleader billh58 Apr 2014 #34

They don't trust the guvmunt n/t doc03 Apr 2014 #31

http://www.thecmp.org/ jeepnstein May 2014 #39