Federally funded armed guards is an exercise of police power. Just because they are not nominally police doesn't change that. Hence, it is you who are the spin artist here.
Example: You had to add "education and training" to your qualification of a gun rights organization, even though I had already acknowledged the NRA's effectiveness in that light (also noting their failure to go to that strength with their proposed prescription). You did that to try to force me to agree that the NRA is the leader in that regard, thus holding them as an effective gun rights organization, which they are not.
That's duplicity and misrepresentation on your part. Your projections match the tactics of a Democrat in that regard.
Example: When I posted about how background checks that the NRA has supported to this day were abused with FIST, you didn't acknowledge it at all. Despite the fact that the NRA had warning of such and witnessed said abuse before the fact, they supported it anyway. Hence, they continue to support what is effectively gun registration by another name.
You just left that one alone. That's dishonest too. So you can fling crap all you like, but so far, it looks to me like you are wearing it.
Never, never, never give a government increased police powers without serious consideration along with obvious and quickly exercisable means to rescind that extension of federal power. Yet that is exactly what the NRA proposes. Never do it in the heat of the political moment. Yet that is exactly what the NRA has done. Once said "armed guards" are in place (and doing not a damned thing 95% of the time in return for their fat paychecks, health care plans, and crooked retirement funds foisted upon States teetering upon bankruptcy), there is every reason to expect both failure to act and abuse of power. So the net effect I see with the NRA proposal is that "retired police officers" will get TWO outrageous pensions instead of one. Worse, the school district faces the prospects of crippling lawsuits should they refuse by following some other more cost effective path.
You are very heavy on personal attacks, having offered NOTHING in the way of exculpatory evidence upon behalf of the NRA.
You're very heavy on lies, allegations and accusations.
The NRA is the premier gun rights organization in the US if not in the world. In case you didn't notice, the anti-gun nuts attacked the NRA, not the GOA, JPFO or SAF.
Federally funded armed guards is an exercise of police power.
Nowhere was there a call for a national "police force" for schools as you asserted. Why do you find it necessary to lie?
When I posted about how background checks that the NRA has supported to this day were abused with FIST, you didn't acknowledge it at all.
You lied when you stated the NRA is no friend of liberty and the organization supported limiting magazine sizes.
Are you sure you aren't Feinstein or a clone?