Posted on 01/25/2013 7:15:05 PM PST by Kaslin
It's the common talking point from left leaning media and gun control advocates: NRA leaders are out of touch with NRA members and the organization is disagreement over top gun control issues. Turns out, the exact opposite is true. The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action conducted a national scientific poll of NRA members this week and found the vast majority are on the same page regarding a wide range of issues, in particular when it comes to new gun control measures and how to prevent mass shootings. One-thousand members were randomly selected for the poll. The NRA is the only organization with access the membership list. From the survey:
Key Findings:
91% of NRA members support laws keeping firearms away from the mentally ill.
92% of NRA members oppose gun confiscation via mandatory buy-back laws.
89% oppose banning semi-automatic firearms, often mistakenly called “assault rifles”.
93% oppose a law requiring gun owners to register with the federal government.
92% oppose a new federal law banning the sale of firearms between private citizens.Methodology – The national survey was conducted by OnMessage Inc. Telephone interviews were conducted January 13-14, 2013. This survey consists of 1,000 NRA members and was stratified by state to reflect voter distribution in the 2012 presidential election. The margin of error for this survey is +/- 3.09%.
The survey also showed the NRA is more favorable among members than President Obama by 93.6 percent. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is even more unfavorable to NRA members.
The NRA has seen 100,000 new members since December.
I live in New York city (unfortunately) and if anyone wants to see how bad it can get under a fanatical anti-gun despot who has a blind eye towards the mentally ill, come here.
In this past month alone we’ve had an absolute shietload of people killed, injured, maimed you name it by psychos allowed to wander the streets of New York.
This guy Sunando Sen I knew from when I use to drive a taxi a few years back is now dead because a psycho - the type totally ignored by anti-gun despot Mike Bloomberg - decided to push Mr. Sen onto the subway tracks, and incredibly at a subway station less than a block from where I live.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/subway-shove-victim-identified-sunando-sen-article-1.1228987
In Times square about a week earlier an asian man was also pushed to his death by a psycho “who was talking to himself minutes earlier”.
On an on it goes, and this pig of a Mayor says absolute NADA... until someone gets killed by a gun, THEN comes the press conference and the calls for gun control.
That target is the NRA.
They want the masses to think that the NRA represents all things gun related, and that the organization is the huge, corporate, evil enemy.
We need to pick a target of our own. Make that target the symbol, the representative of the gun grabbers, and attack that target relentlessly.
I think that Biden is the obvious choice.
He is the administration's point man on guns.
He will be touring the country, pushing Feinstein's bill and others.
He has a conflict of interest in that he was the sponsor of the original Gun Free School Zone legislation, and now he's supposed to examine the issue following Newton and make recommendations? Did we really expect him to find that his own bill was the biggest problem leading to school shootings?
We can't be accused of racism or feminism for speaking out against an old white guy.
The left was just about ready to abandon him anyway in the last election because they thought he endangered O's election.
Let’s get another one on the record: more NRA members pick “personal defense” as their primary reason for owning a gun than the “rebellion against tyranny” straw man that has become Talking Point Number 1 for the government-media complex.
Do we blame AAA for car crashes?
Finally, we get to something that wasn't Bush's fault ... it was Biden's fault that Newtown was a hunting preserve for the innocent.
Maybe we should blame AARP for old age and cancer/
“Let’s get another one on the record: more NRA members pick “personal defense” as their primary reason for owning a gun than the “rebellion against tyranny” straw man that has become Talking Point Number 1 for the government-media complex.”
Jiggy, the poll may well be true in terms of contemporary motives.
But it isn’t a straw man. The written record is pretty clear that, for the founding fathers, the ability to rebel against tyranny and the ability to instill a healthy fear of their constituents in our leaders was the principal reason behind the second amendment.
Naturally. Self defense from criminals is the more likely justification for resort to deadly force.
Odd, in a way, that criminals being armed justifies the honest being armed. But that oddity lies at the rock bottom root that justifies honest folks to have the upper hand in force.
At some extreme points, self-defense and resistance to tyranny merge. Self defense is all encompassing.
Every responsible firearm owner should make a point of taking calmly, firmly and with lots of facts to several friends who favor gun control.
I have been conducting debates and sharing selected article on social media with friends and relatives as well as friends and coworkers in person, since Sandy Hook. Some are now starting to challenge their MSM facts that don't seem to hold up. Others are now starting to back away from talking points that have no basis in fact. Perhaps the most interesting change has been the change from “outrage” at the NRA for suggesting armed guards at schools to agreement when they learned that Bill Clinton as a one year after Columbine solution to school violence was providing federal grants to put armed police in schools. Making them admit that the NRA and Bill Clinton both thought that good guys with guns in schools was a solution forced a lot of them to have to look a little more closely at the issues as opposed to who proposed the solution.
We need to show our passion, concern, and sincerity in finding real solutions not symbolic, feel good political actions that accomplish no change in violence.
The gun banners are either "useful idiots" or they plan the worst.
.
I think that's a tougher sell with today's electorate. It's at least a two step process.
Step one is convincing them that, contrary to what they've heard all of their lives, the second amendment isn't about hunting. It is about protection of freedom.
Step two is overcoming their normalcy bias. Even if they aren't scared off by step one, most won't believe it can happen in America.
Naturally. Self defense from criminals is the more likely justification for resort to deadly force.more NRA members pick "personal defense" as their primary reason for owning a gun than the "rebellion against tyranny" straw man that has become Talking Point Number 1 for the government-media complex. - jiggyboy
Odd, in a way, that criminals being armed justifies the honest being armed. But that oddity lies at the rock bottom root that justifies honest folks to have the upper hand in force.
At some extreme points, self-defense and resistance to tyranny merge. Self defense is all encompassing.
There are, like, laws against someone breaking in your door, and against murdering you. But at the time and place of a criminal’s choosing, a law book is not a particularly effective shield against violation of those laws. So the question becomes one of making provision against being at a time and place of a criminal’s choosing. One way is to have your own personal cop looking out for you, like the president and his family have. But of course that begs the question of who is protecting the family of the cop who is preventing all criminals from violating laws against attacking you. That is an unaffordable system, and it still begs the question of who credentials the cop so that we know he won’t break any laws.Now I agree with Dean Martin; the right standard for gun control is that I have weapons and nobody else does. But of course that would be unworkable, and certainly not politically attainable. Ultimately citizens need equality of violent potential. And unless you are willing to shackle the young, the male, and the physically fit down to the the same violent potential of an old woman, the only way of equalizing the violent potential of citizens is for the weak to moot their strength disadvantages. There is a mechanism which can do that. It’s called, “a gun.”
People who raise alarums, not over violence in general but over gun violence in particular are actually opposing the only mechanism by which violent potential can be democratized. It’s easy to assume that since guns increase violence potential, reducing guns would reduce violence. But since there are thousands of gun owners for every annual gun murder, we know that guns alone are not the problem. The real problem is a small subset of gun wielders who were irresponsible before they ever got a gun. And who, preponderantly, do not own the gun legitimately. And who, with or without guns of their own, would be even more of a problem for society if they were free of the constraint of Dean Martin’s nemesis - other people’s guns.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.