NRA Supports Bump Stock Regulation

[Hop]

How do I enter text on my rotary?

You have to convert rotary to dial tone. Pull the phone cord really tight then pluck it to generate the correct frequency. Like a guitar string. 440 Hz would be an "A".

 

[2A_Tom]

You use the letters in the dial of course. In the army they taught me there were no stupid questions, but you guys come awefuly close.

 

[Alpo]

You have to convert rotary to dial tone. Pull the phone cord really tight then pluck it to generate the correct frequency. Like a guitar string. 440 Hz would be an "A".

James Taylor tuning is best. Then you get pure tones with a capo.

 

[eldirector]

How do I enter text on my rotary?

There have been letters on rotary phones since, what, the 1920's?

Now the hash, pound, number sign, or whatever you want to call it...

I guess, call the operator, tell her you want to "Pound INGO". Of course, she will ask, "Why? What did INGO ever do to you?"

 

[2A_Tom]

Eldirector Are there some INGOers you would like to#?

 

[actaeon277]

Well, this seems fair...

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...roposal-resolving-americas-gun-rights-debate/

WTF!!!

And that is a pro site.

Yes, it's a pro gun site.
But... "Reader MO writes:"
1) It was not staff
2) The "Reader" is a FUDD.
They exist.
The site put it there.
then people can yell at him in the comments.

 

[jamil]

Yes, it's a pro gun site.
But... "Reader MO writes:"
1) It was not staff
2) The "Reader" is a FUDD.
They exist.
The site put it there.
then people can yell at him in the comments.

Seems like a non-fudd reader should submit a response.

Get in line.

 

[Floivanus]

Yes, it's a pro gun site.
But... "Reader MO writes:"
1) It was not staff
2) The "Reader" is a FUDD.
They exist.
The site put it there.
then people can yell at him in the comments.

I have a simple solution, repeal Hughes.
shut up about bumpfire
leave us alone

 

[T.Lex]

So... I got a call from the NRA about joining. The lady on the line said that Wayne LaPierre himself had asked her to call me. It was a real live person, which was kinda funny. She had a very specific script, that rambled on in many different directions.

She started out saying they were conducting a poll on gun issues. Her first question was whether I continued to support President Trump in his many efforts to fight back gun control.

Probably not a great place to start with me. I said that I hoped the president would support gun rights in deed and not just words. I don't think she understood. Because she continued.

Her next "question" started about reciprocity, moved into all the people being arrested across the country for exercising their 2A rights and how the courts were trying to legislate gun control, then went straight for the call to action to donate $140 for a ($20) range bag and ($10) knife. With the tag line being that Wayne really wanted to know if he could count on my support.

My brain was kinda reeling from all the things I wanted to say to address the actual things she said, but then I just told her that I thought Wayne was doing a terrible job right now and should be fired.

She thanked me for my time.

Timing is everything.

 

[Kutnupe14]

So... I got a call from the NRA about joining. The lady on the line said that Wayne LaPierre himself had asked her to call me. It was a real live person, which was kinda funny. She had a very specific script, that rambled on in many different directions.

She started out saying they were conducting a poll on gun issues. Her first question was whether I continued to support President Trump in his many efforts to fight back gun control.

Probably not a great place to start with me. I said that I hoped the president would support gun rights in deed and not just words. I don't think she understood. Because she continued.

Her next "question" started about reciprocity, moved into all the people being arrested across the country for exercising their 2A rights and how the courts were trying to legislate gun control, then went straight for the call to action to donate $140 for a ($20) range bag and ($10) knife. With the tag line being that Wayne really wanted to know if he could count on my for support.

My brain was kinda reeling from all the things I wanted to say to address the actual things she said, but then I just told her that I thought Wayne was doing a terrible job right now and should be fired.

She thanked me for my time.

Timing is everything.

You know Wayne??? What's his house look like?

 

[Libertarian01]

I need to admit when I am wrong, and on this one I was wrong. The diehards were right. Mea Culpa to all.

New poll shows Las Vegas shooting doesn't change opinions on guns - LA Times

I thought that the NRA was correct as the damage on this would reverberate nationally and those on the fence would would be pushed severely toward gun control regulation. However, according to this poll the numbers have barely moved.

I am glad on this issue I was wrong.

Regards,

Doug

PS - I reserve the right to change my mind with the presentation of new data, but barring that, my bad.

 

[actaeon277]

The same thing happens EVERY time.

 

[jamil]

I need to admit when I am wrong, and on this one I was wrong. The diehards were right. Mea Culpa to all.

New poll shows Las Vegas shooting doesn't change opinions on guns - LA Times

I thought that the NRA was correct as the damage on this would reverberate nationally and those on the fence would would be pushed severely toward gun control regulation. However, according to this poll the numbers have barely moved.

I am glad on this issue I was wrong.

Regards,

Doug

PS - I reserve the right to change my mind with the presentation of new data, but barring that, my bad.

I had some long discussions with many coworkers right after, and honestly I thought they'd start talking about gun control. But every one of them pretty much said the same thing, that it's the person, not the guns at fault. Most people can figure this out. But there are certain types of people that just seem susceptible to anti-gun zealotry.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I had some long discussions with many coworkers right after, and honestly I thought they'd start talking about gun control. But every one of them pretty much said the same thing, that it's the person, not the guns at fault. Most people can figure this out. But there are certain types of people that just seem susceptible to anti-gun zealotry.

I honestly thought if we could fend off anti-gun zealotry after Sandy Hook and the death of all of those innocent children, this event should be relatively easy to shrug off (in regards to the call for more "common sense" gun laws). I still don't understand why so many got weak-kneed after this.

 

[T.Lex]

I honestly thought if we could fend off anti-gun zealotry after Sandy Hook and the death of all of those innocent children, this event should be relatively easy to shrug off (in regards to the call for more "common sense" gun laws). I still don't understand why so many got weak-kneed after this.

^^^^ This.

Well.

I do understand why people felt soft after this. But, understanding it does not mean adopting it. As cold as it may seem, a gallic shrug is about all the tragedy should garner at a policy level.

 

[spencer rifle]

Heard a segment yesterday on NPR where disembodied voices lamented how awful it was that this tragedy isn't moving the gun control legislation forward, and how horrible it was that "progress" has ground to a halt, and how the evil NRA and their money are solely responsible.

The tears of leftists are ever so sweet.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

^^^^ This.

Well.

I do understand why people felt soft after this. But, understanding it does not mean adopting it. As cold as it may seem, a gallic shrug is about all the tragedy should garner at a policy level.

About the only reason I could see for this is because of all the video being available. We didn't see the replays of the kids getting mowed down. I can recognize this difference could have made a difference in the perceptions...I'm glad it didn't though.

 

[Libertarian01]

I honestly thought if we could fend off anti-gun zealotry after Sandy Hook and the death of all of those innocent children, this event should be relatively easy to shrug off (in regards to the call for more "common sense" gun laws). I still don't understand why so many got weak-kneed after this.

I don't know if I was weak-kneed, but perhaps I was.

My thinking was that with Sandy Hook there would be 26 funerals, all in Newtown, CT. The national media coverage would be massive, but the local impact stuff would be limited to basically one (1) county in Connecticut. The same with most other mass shootings.

The Las Vegas shooting is another matter. The national news coverage would of course be exactly the same. That is a zero sum game. All the national news outlets will do the same thing, so no big difference there. However, the difference is that the 58 deaths may well be spread all over the country. So if half of them are all in the same towns, that is adding on 29 local news coverage all showing the horror brought home. If the 500+ wounded were all overlapping again by just half then that is 250+ local news outlets all telling the tragedy and horror of the event for their local survivor. This doesn't even count the maybe thousands of social media outlets like Facebook posts all telling either a first hand horror story and/or a friends horror story.

There are three (3) "sides" to almost any issue: Those for, those against, and those on the fence. In this case those for more gun control will be out there screaming, as usual. Those against (that's us), understand that no additional legislation will stop this tragedy. These sides almost never change. However, I expected those on the fence to be pushed more toward our opponents side. To demand something be done.

With that concern (or weak-kneed approach) I thought the NRA was correct to at least show some flexibility on potential new bump-stock regulations.

This is where I WAS WRONG. According to the poll those on the fence either didn't get off of it OR they don't care OR they are more reasonable than I imagined. As I am a cynic I chafe at the third explanation, but perhaps there is hope.

With that in mind I will re-clarify that I never supported banning or unilateral surrender, only that the NRA may have been correct on being willing to not fight new bump-stock regulations if and only if they received some benefit for firearms owners, such as immediate national reciprocity. There could be others that don't come to mind right now.

Overall we are going down a path where the younger generation does not appreciate the importance of ALL of the rights the Bill of Rights is designed to protect. A growing percentage of them say we don't "need" automatic weapons. A growing percentage of them don't believe that "hate speech" (whatever that is) is not or should not be protected by the 1st Amendment. So I thought this would also contribute to a push for greater regulation(s).

I am glad I was wrong.

I hope this illuminates a bit.

Regards,

Doug

PS - I still reserve the right to equivocate depending upon how this issue/event plays out in the 2018 elections. And I hope I remain wrong.

 

[actaeon277]

I don't know if I was weak-kneed, but perhaps I was.

My thinking was that with Sandy Hook there would be 26 funerals, all in Newtown, CT. The national media coverage would be massive, but the local impact stuff would be limited to basically one (1) county in Connecticut. The same with most other mass shootings.

The Las Vegas shooting is another matter. The national news coverage would of course be exactly the same. That is a zero sum game. All the national news outlets will do the same thing, so no big difference there. However, the difference is that the 58 deaths may well be spread all over the country. So if half of them are all in the same towns, that is adding on 29 local news coverage all showing the horror brought home. If the 500+ wounded were all overlapping again by just half then that is 250+ local news outlets all telling the tragedy and horror of the event for their local survivor. This doesn't even count the maybe thousands of social media outlets like Facebook posts all telling either a first hand horror story and/or a friends horror story.

There are three (3) "sides" to almost any issue: Those for, those against, and those on the fence. In this case those for more gun control will be out there screaming, as usual. Those against (that's us), understand that no additional legislation will stop this tragedy. These sides almost never change. However, I expected those on the fence to be pushed more toward our opponents side. To demand something be done.

With that concern (or weak-kneed approach) I thought the NRA was correct to at least show some flexibility on potential new bump-stock regulations.

This is where I WAS WRONG. According to the poll those on the fence either didn't get off of it OR they don't care OR they are more reasonable than I imagined. As I am a cynic I chafe at the third explanation, but perhaps there is hope.

With that in mind I will re-clarify that I never supported banning or unilateral surrender, only that the NRA may have been correct on being willing to not fight new bump-stock regulations if and only if they received some benefit for firearms owners, such as immediate national reciprocity. There could be others that don't come to mind right now.

Overall we are going down a path where the younger generation does not appreciate the importance of ALL of the rights the Bill of Rights is designed to protect. A growing percentage of them say we don't "need" automatic weapons. A growing percentage of them don't believe that "hate speech" (whatever that is) is not or should not be protected by the 1st Amendment. So I thought this would also contribute to a push for greater regulation(s).

I am glad I was wrong.

I hope this illuminates a bit.

Regards,

Doug

PS - I still reserve the right to equivocate depending upon how this issue/event plays out in the 2018 elections. And I hope I remain wrong.

I think, mostly, except for younger people, everyone (unfortunately) has seen this before and heard all the arguments/counter-arguments.
The people "on the fence" have heard them also.

 

[actaeon277]

And in case anyone thinks we need to give a little to prevent it from getting worse......


Rob Kneaul
2 weeks ago
I'm calling for legislation to ban magazine fed or clip fed firearms with a clause requiring all firearms to be modified to be fed a single bullet at a time making it a felony to possess a firearm that is anything but single bullet at a time fed after the five year implementation period with a magazine of not more than fifteen bullets. Also make it a felony to possess hardware that makes quick feeding of magazines possible. If you need more than fifteen bullets at a time for self defense you're either an idiot or a horrible shot.


OPINION | To stop slaughter in America we must remove Republican officials - New York Daily News | outdonews.com