Gun-rights groups see opportunity in hard month

[novice]

from the Houston Chronicle:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...s/6570562.html

The Senate votes on carry across state lines and the confirmation of Justice Sotomayor are seperating the wheat from the chaff as far as whether Senators are 100% pro-gun or not. (Like or own Spector who is viewed as a strong supporter of gun rights, but not 100%).

Gillibrand and Specter face a double dose of retaliation from the NRA — they also opposed the concealed-carry measure.

Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said the recent pressure is “an example of the NRA overreaching.”

“Extremists have hijacked the NRA agenda,” Helmke said. “I think most people are in the middle ground on guns. I think the NRA is getting pushed to the extreme.”

Personally, I disagree. I'm in the middle ground on guns, so I joined the NRA. I think there's enough gun control already and too much in some places. I think support for gun rights is broader and deeper than the antis could beleive.

[Warpt762x39]

Trust me, the anti's know exactly how much support there is for gun rights. They just choose not to care.

[pennsyltucky]

an anti wouldnt care if they were the only person on the planet opposed to guns. their only desire is to take them away from you.

[Warpt762x39]

an anti wouldnt care if they were the only person on the planet opposed to guns. their only desire is to take them away from you.

Many anti gunners don't think all guns should be taken away. Just from "untrustworthy" people i.e. themselves.

I've met a couple of ant gunners who hate the fact that millions of people own guns and want them taken away. But they themselves love to shoot and think that they should be able to own guns. Just not other people.

[jerkin]

Many anti gunners don't think all guns should be taken away. Just from "untrustworthy" people i.e. themselves.

I've met a couple of ant gunners who hate the fact that millions of people own guns and want them taken away. But they themselves love to shoot and think that they should be able to own guns. Just not other people.

There are a few of those types right here on this site.

[MuzzleFlash]

Personally, I disagree. I'm in the middle ground on guns, so I joined the NRA. I think there's enough gun control already and too much in some places. I think support for gun rights is broader and deeper than the antis could beleive.

I'm curious what “the middle” is. The UK and Canada could be seen as the middle. You're allowed to own guns there, so long as you fill out the appropriate paperwork just as we do to a lesser degree. The only gun, knife, brass knuckle, or weapon law that should matter at all is 2A. I wouldn't consider restrictive laws or licenses until it came down to nuclear weapons, and even then I wouldn't vote to disallow private ownership.

Many anti gunners don't think all guns should be taken away. Just from "untrustworthy" people i.e. themselves.

I've met a couple of ant gunners who hate the fact that millions of people own guns and want them taken away. But they themselves love to shoot and think that they should be able to own guns. Just not other people.

The antis I've meet only believe guns are useful for hunting and target shooting, it's a sport and nothing more. A sport too costly to maintain because of how many people are killed. A rogue government is something that happens in the history books and could never happen today or ever again. Something just doesn't click, they fail to realize that history is merely the past and future history is the present. To me, “anti” is synonymous with someone who has a very poor understanding, if any, of history.

[General Geoff]

The only anti-gun person with anywhere-near a sound belief structure is the one who thinks all government agents (including police) should be disarmed too. To say otherwise is literally endorsing and condoning tyranny.

Not saying that's a truly sound argument either, since that would effectively turn the clock back to the Dark Ages, where the rich and strong ruled with an iron fist over the poor and weak...

[TaePo]

This is just a backhanded way to divide the membership within NRA from the 'pure' sportsman enthusiasts and hunters vs. self defense believers.

Basically, they are saying that NRA should stick to sporting arms like they always have historically and enough of the radical defend yourself from criminals and tyranny crap. This help drives a wedge into the membership. I have noticed more of a change within NRA from hunting to the true political and societal means of guns as defensive tools.

Actually, guns are both and both sides are needed to maintain ownership rights. But really, if you look at our Forefathers' debates and writings, you will see that hunting is just a side benefit of the 2A. Protecting oneself and ones state/government was the paramount reason for it.

[Warpt762x39]

The antis I've meet only believe guns are useful for hunting and target shooting, it's a sport and nothing more. A sport too costly to maintain because of how many people are killed. A rogue government is something that happens in the history books and could never happen today or ever again. Something just doesn't click, they fail to realize that history is merely the past and future history is the present. To me, “anti” is synonymous with someone who has a very poor understanding, if any, of history.

First off. Earlier today I was watching one of the cable news shows, I don't remember which. At the bottom of the screen was comments people had sent in about the guys who carried guns to the protests including the guy with the AR (which was a pretty nice AR from what I saw lol).

One of the comments left said something to the effect of "Guns are fine for when you go out hunting, but any other time they shouldn't leave your property because when you bring a gun in public it violates the polices right to do their job"

I had to change the channel and leave the room after I read that one. I have the right to keep and bear arms. The police have no "right to do their job". In fact they don't even have a duty to protect any individual.

On the second part, all I have to say is "Those who fail to understand history are doomed to repeat it".