|
California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"NRA vs. America," a Rollingstone politics article critical of the NRA
Hi all!
I generally enjoy and respect Rollingstone's politics reporting. Here is a link the January 31, 2013 article by Tom Dickinson. I believe it's worth a read. You may or may not agree with this but it's out in the popular press and it's worth your attention. http://rol.st/14wEi90 Carry on! KLF |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
They seem to forget that the NRA is not some faceless entity. The NRA is the face of Americans voicing their opinion.
__________________
"CGF, so powerful we must be the NRA" - Gene Hoffman |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Fortunately for us Rolling Stone lacks the pull it used to have. Thanks to video game developers and TV the new generation has a love affair with firearms. Ask any kid in their 20s why they bought an AR and I guarantee you 9 out of 10 times the answer is "call of duty". I wouldn't necessarily say that this means that Generation Y seems more conservative, just that my observation is they love guns... I've certainly done my part and introduced a lot of them to the second amendment on gun ranges and to date have no complaints heh!
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
You owe me 15 minutes. I suppose some will be along to defend that hatchet job.
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
This article is in the public, but it's not worth the read. It's the same tired crap bemoaning the power of the NRA and all its money and power. I almost stopped reading after the subtitle, but understanding that this is an article with a targeted audience, I cut a little slack and kept going hoping that it was just subtitular hyperbole; unfortunately, the entire article is more of the same.
For the condensed version, just watch one of these damned Piers Morgan "debates." ETA: I feel like the purpose of the article was to gin up support for people to donate to gun control advocates. It becomes especially illuminating when he accuses Wayne La Pierre of, and describes the subversion of the NRA and how it's tricking the membership into this massive money-making conspiracy. It was almost like a I reached a point where the article was metatextually mirroring itself. It'd be an interesting exercise in literature were it not so politically driven and blatantly reliant on inflammatory language. To the the writer's credit, I really did think it was interesting how the article reads like it's doing exactly the same thing it's describing. It's inspiring how starkly (if unintentionally) he's able to depict the divide in the USA about firearms. Last edited by phamkl; 01-31-2013 at 8:07 PM.. |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Interesting... "The NRA vs. America"... The way I see it, I am the NRA and America.
__________________
If I ever refer to BCM as BMC, its a slip as I often think of BMC when I'm thinking BCM lol. BMC, as in Bicycle Manufacturing Company. "...Remember your Oath." |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Poorly written article and utter nonsense IMO. Seems like another author is not sy at all to stand on the graves of others to push an agenda or sell a story. Absolute trash in a garbage magazine.
__________________
Quote:
Ahhhhhhhhhhh! Man that was some great Kool-Aid.......... hmmmmmm theres a hint of something metallic. Oh well guess I will get on with the voting. |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Rolling Stone can't even publish decent articles on the music. Why would I want to read their crap about the NRA? No thanks.
__________________
Former political prisoner who escaped on 9-24-23. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Well folks, I'm glad some of you read it even if it seems none of you like it. It's easy to say Rollingstone simply doesn't matter. Maybe, but I know many who take Rollingstone seriously. I've also seen many cites and points to articles from far less-mainstream sources. When people are going after my rights I read and listen to what they have to say. Anyhow, on Page 3, the author writes about something called "The Tiahrt Amendment." I heard about this on Terry Gross' NPR show, as well as disperate other sources. I suppose I'll see many gruff blurts from people, but it would be gratifying if someone added to this. To me, this seems like an effort to completely undermine a body of facts that are commonly cited in this cultural debate. I believe I know the facts, but what of this movement to write those facts off as methodologically flawed and therefore without foundation? What of this? Is this a thing?
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
NRA vs America? What do they thing the NRA is composed of, Russians?
__________________
NRA-ILA Lawmaker Contact Tool “When you want to kill a man, you must shoot for the heart and the Winchester is the best weapon." -Ramon, A Fistful of Dollars Quote:
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
I stopped reading at the sub-headline, where it says "military grade".
__________________
Vote for pro-gun candidates, or lose your rights, and the rights of future generations. That's it. The end. "No one said life would be easy". |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
The Tiahrt Amendment was a provision attached to a 2006 spending bill that limits the ways gun related data can be used, specifically, requiring certain background checks for guns be destroyed within 24 hours, limiting the access to ATF data and statistics, including those of guns lost/stolen from FFL's, to criminal investigations.
Probably one of the only laws regarding or increasing the privacy of a citizen passed in the last 13 years. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
If the NRA were a true activist and true friend of gun owners, it would not have let California and New York and several other states pass stringent gun laws.
But the NRA did indeed let these states pass stringent gun laws. Why? From the article: >Much like elite funders of a major political party, these Golden Ringers enjoy top access to decision-makers at the NRA. Their interests, not the interest of the $35-a-year member, rule the roost. "They've got this base of true believers that they mail their magazines out to," says policy analyst Diaz. "But the NRA is really about serving this elite." (CDF): Full disclosure: I used to be an NRA member. Before I joined, I feared they were just a lobbying arm of gun manufacturers, an organization that merely paid lip service to fighting gun laws. I was correct. So I bailed. I read American Rifleman every single month for three years. All they did was to publish hyperbole in their editorials. They would send me fund raising notes all the time. What did they do with that money? A true organization fighting stringent gun laws would not pay its leaders six figure salaries while gun owners have to get show ID to buy ammo. Follow the money. Nope. They're going to have to work MUCH HARDER to get another single cent from me. CDFingers Last edited by CDFingers; 02-01-2013 at 5:57 AM.. Reason: rented an italics machine for a bit |
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Makes me even more happy to be an NRA member when a worthless rag like Rolling Stones ( who reads that rag anyways) is bashing them....maybe they can have tea with Feinstein and talk about their mutual hatred for the NRA?
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
And there it is.
__________________
Quote:
|
#27
|
||||
|
||||
Perhaps right now is the appropriate time for the NRA to run some ads in the mainstream media that show who the NRA is. All of the libtard friends and relatives I have are convinced that the NRA is just a faceless, evil, corporate lobbying group for the gun manufacturers.
They don't get it that the NRA is us, all of us who are members. |
#29
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Yes, it IS out there. MILLIONS of people will read it. That being reality, counter arguments should be at the ready. Here's a couple. Quote:
The NRA is NOT an industry shill. People who talk of what they should get do so because its something that they don't get. Quote:
This is all donated money, whether from our dues or from corporate sponsors. Which means that every penny the NRA spends is given to them. Politics isn't a money game. Its a numbers game. More people on your side (usually) means you win. Take a look at the money here. The Bradys spent a mere $3,000. That's because their sponsors are few in number. We were able to spend $24 MILLION because we have more people on our side giving more money. Mr. Drutman is completely correct. It IS a tug of war. Because its supposed to be. That's the way a free society works. The "rope" ends up where it does because more of We The People want it there then don't. Yet, instead of celebrating the fact the system is working just as it should, Rolling Stone decries the results. Hmmm. The Raisuli
__________________
"Ignorance is a steep hill with perilous rocks at the bottom" WTB: 9mm cylinder for Taurus Mod. 85 |
#31
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Wait don't tell me, I believe I know the answer already! You voted twice for a Chicago politician who as a State Senator supported a bill banning citizens from defending themselves inside their homes with a gun in case of a home invasion. The same politician who was on the Board of the Joyce Foundation, the #1 sponsoring organization for anti-gun causes in the entire world. The guy who promised a new AWB ban during his last electoral campaign and now has unleashed his lapdogs in the media to brainwash the masses to accept it as a necessary measure. Yep, you certainly helped preserving the RKBA a lot more than the NRA lobbyist did. PM me your address, I want to mail you a check for your efforts.
__________________
BLACK RIFLES MATTER! Last edited by tankarian; 02-01-2013 at 7:47 AM.. |
#32
|
||||
|
||||
CD, you sure do take every opportunity to run your mouth. Regarding the NRA in CA - in one way or another you have Mr. Ed Whorley to thank for CA legal ARs. You should stop biting the hand that feeds.
|
#33
|
||||
|
||||
Years ago when Britney Spears was still underage, rolling stone did a photo shoot with her in black and white with a damp sarong , well guess what you could totally see her bush, that meant that some execs at rolling stone had a nice long board meeting deciding what the allowable amount of underage bush they could get away with ....so after that afraid i just can't take them serious anymore.
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
What do I do?
Every single semester my students are treated to the "Responsible California Gun Owner" paper. You're welcome. I run my fingers. I no longer need move my lips as I type... PM sent for check. CDFingers Last edited by CDFingers; 02-01-2013 at 7:54 AM.. Reason: bought some letters |
#35
|
||||
|
||||
I pity the fools who picked you to teach them. Another generation of gun-hating statist Obamazombies in the making.
PM reply sent. I'm on my way to CVS to pick up a bottle of Dulcolax. Promise is a promise.
__________________
BLACK RIFLES MATTER! |
#36
|
||||
|
||||
Look, in a lot of ways I have to hold my nose when I donate to the NRA. I've got no problem admitting that. But you can't say they are a waste of time. The stuff Ed works on is behind the scenes legislative stuff. It's a good thing you don't hear about him, that means he's doing his job well.
|
#37
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Last edited by SgtDinosaur; 02-01-2013 at 8:12 AM.. |
#38
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I'll chip in . . . . . . .
__________________
Quote:
|
#39
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
This kind of lack of logical thinking just blows your mind away. And what's even worse, this guy gets paid with our tax money to
__________________
BLACK RIFLES MATTER! Last edited by tankarian; 02-01-2013 at 8:22 AM.. |
#40
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Couldn't get past the 3rd paragraph though. I will say though, I love reading the "comments" section of articles like this. The author is just getting owned by an overwhelmingly pro-gun majority. It's refreshing to see so many not giving this garbage propaganda any quarter. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|