I guess presidential subversion of the legislative body by using his executive position to order his appointees to change federal rules is better than an eo.... Made Pelosi proud. How can the NRA still give him an A rating when he is actively seeking to make millions of Americans forfeit legal accessories, because they proved that they may actually have a militia purpose? I don't think it gets anymore anti 2a. The NRA started this ball rolling unprompted and trump ran with it after nra got some pushback and tried to cover their tracks. So again, when the NRA backed off of bumpstocks, they didn't push trump to back off. They sat at a meeting with papa and he told them (us) that he was taking our accessories away and there is nothing anyone can do about it. Should have been an instant smear campaign rather than the monthly trump boot licking that takes place in rifleman. In essence the NRA is empowering trump by not calling him on his bull*&^%.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Time to drain the NRA Swamp?
- Thread starter Ggreen
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
This sums up my thoughts well. While I realize other organizations don't have the power and numbers that the NRA does, I don't want to associate myself with the current NRA. Getting rid of Loesch would be a good start. The NRA would get a lot further with someone who was informative yet respectful, rather than ranting like Loesch.
That's my perception, too. However, I'm not well enough versed in the particular cases to be able to state that.
THIS.
AFAIK, The NRA is not a non-profit organization.
If the GOA is so great about being "not one inchers", then why isn't the GOA winning?
Not touching that...
Millions? Do you really think there's "millions" of bumpstocks?
My perception is that the GOA is tough and scrappy, but the NRA is big and wise when it comes to battles.
Trump started talking about EOs, then switched to pushing through legislation by executive branch agency (blatantly unconstitutional), but by your last statement you obviously knew that. So, I don't know why you are playing semantic games, as it doesn't change the end result. Whether by EO or by Justice/ATF, neither way is constitutional and proves Trump is a corrupt, lying POS.
Who says they've backed off? They still have a joint statement on their website supporting the ban on bump-stock and similar accessories...
https://home.nra.org/joint-statement
Apparently it's time to upgrade my NRA life membership again since I'm almost done paying for all my kids life memberships.
I don't get much money but I donate what I can because my family and guns are worth it. All those "Other" organizations are great to have around (I guess) but how come the NRA is the only group that goes to battle for our rights when something major happens.
I know they're far from perfect but really, nit picking their flaws as their traitors to the country is lame. Show me an organization that will go to bat for us and make a difference and I might switch groups. The left always talks about the power of the NRA all the way up though the government level. I've never heard them mention anyone else that could make any difference at all.
They also need to have real cool bumperstickers and decals.
Trump is from NY with old liberal tendencies so yes it was risky voting for him. He is still doing almost everything I told him to do when I hired him.
If Hillary was the president, we would be having a radically different conversation right now. That is if INGO was still allowed on the web at all.
We would be talking about burial vaults and cache systems like back in CA in the 90s when Hillary was president back then. CA had that assault ban long before you guys did nationally. Gun shows consisted of mainly loophole guns and burial tubes table after table.
I don't get much money but I donate what I can because my family and guns are worth it. All those "Other" organizations are great to have around (I guess) but how come the NRA is the only group that goes to battle for our rights when something major happens.
I know they're far from perfect but really, nit picking their flaws as their traitors to the country is lame. Show me an organization that will go to bat for us and make a difference and I might switch groups. The left always talks about the power of the NRA all the way up though the government level. I've never heard them mention anyone else that could make any difference at all.
They also need to have real cool bumperstickers and decals.
Trump is from NY with old liberal tendencies so yes it was risky voting for him. He is still doing almost everything I told him to do when I hired him.
If Hillary was the president, we would be having a radically different conversation right now. That is if INGO was still allowed on the web at all.
We would be talking about burial vaults and cache systems like back in CA in the 90s when Hillary was president back then. CA had that assault ban long before you guys did nationally. Gun shows consisted of mainly loophole guns and burial tubes table after table.
If I wear an NRA hat - people recognize it.
If it says, "GOA"... maybe they think I vacationed in India.
If it says, "GOA"... maybe they think I vacationed in India.
I don't support them because I don't support their view on gun control. They have consistently, many times, come out in support of all gun control laws that have been passed, with blanket statements such as "We need to enforce the laws on the books." I am fundamentally opposed to this view. I believe we should work to repeal all the gun control laws.
"Gun control" proponents argue that "guns are the problem."
the NRA argues that "Guns are not a very bad problem."
I have fundamental disagreements with the NRA.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/23/nra-chief-enforce-the-existing-gun-laws/
https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/09/poli...orders-gun-control-enforcement-gap/index.html
Alternative positions that you may agree with:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/these...d-they-could-determine-the-current-gun-debate
"Gun control" proponents argue that "guns are the problem."
the NRA argues that "Guns are not a very bad problem."
I have fundamental disagreements with the NRA.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/23/nra-chief-enforce-the-existing-gun-laws/
https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/09/poli...orders-gun-control-enforcement-gap/index.html
Alternative positions that you may agree with:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/these...d-they-could-determine-the-current-gun-debate
This document is out of date; the NRA has compromised on many things since I saved it. I edited it a few years back, but it seems like those changes and additions I made have been lost. At any rate, here's a sample of why I don't support the NRA.
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
| [FONT="]THE NRA[/FONT][FONT="] What HARM can they do / have they done? Let us first consider the “Uniform Machinegun Act of 1932” which provided for the registration of machine guns, that was adopted in a few states (Conn., Va., Md., Ark., and Montana and possibly others) which was developed with the support of the NRA, BEFORE the feds ultimately adopted the “National Firearms Act” in 1934. The reason this stands out, is that MANY people believe that the “National Firearms Act of 1934 was the pivotal law, the first of the UNconstitutional laws. Thereby “starting” an ever widening path, allowing for further infringements. Not so, the NRA was first. "The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol, revolver ammunition. The NRA supported legislation to amend the “Federal Firearms Act” in regard to handguns when it was introduced in August, 1963. In 1965, the NRA continued its support of an expansion of the above legislation to include rifles and shotguns, as well as handguns. Additionally the NRA supported the regulation of the movement of handguns in interstate and foreign commerce by: 1. Requiring a sworn statement, containing certain information, from the purchaser to the seller for the receipt of a handgun in interstate commerce; 2. Providing for notification of local police of prospective sales; 3. Requiring an additional 7-day waiting period by the seller after receipt of acknowledgement of notification to local police; 4. Prescribing a minimum age of 21 for obtaining a license to sell firearms and increasing the license fees; 5. Providing for written notification by manufacturer or dealer to carrier that a firearm is being shipped in interstate commerce, and; 6. Increasing penalties for violation. NRA HELPED WRITE the 1986 federal law prohibiting the manufacture and importation of "armor piercing ammunition" adopted standards. ***** The NRA has been hard at work, over the last few years, turning a RIGHT (guaranteed by our constitution) into a revocable PRIVILEGE. Many pro-gun people commend them for this. Others see it for what it really is. The second amendment states. “The right of the people to keep and BEAR arms” It doesn’t say “to keep and display arms” or “to keep and hide arms” or “to keep and lock up your arms” or “to keep and use arms” it says “to keep and BEAR arms” Look it up in the dictionary. To “bear something” means to CARRY it. Any attempt at “interpreting” the meaning of this, is clearly an anti-gun tactic. ***** “Project EXILE” IS the NRA’s very own project. NRA'S project (EXILE) supports ALL UNconstitutional gun laws. Handgun Control Inc. supports it TOO. NRA-ILA Executive Director James Jay Baker commented, "I'm glad that the president has finally agreed with the NRA that enforcing federal firearms laws makes sense. We've been pushing for more enforcement of existing laws. Did anyone tell them that ALL of the 20,000 gun laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL??? OF COURSE Handgun Control Inc. supports this NRA project. ***** Schools Then NRA Executive Vice President Wayne R. LaPierre, Jr., made these damaging statements during his nationally televised speech at the Denver NRA Members Meeting May 1, 1999. "First, we believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America's schools, period ... with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel.” All across the country, school boards and state legislators started doing precisely what LaPierre suggested: shutting down school riflery programs, prohibiting historical firearms displays, forbidding hunter safety training with unloaded guns, and banning gun possession by teachers and other adults with carry licenses. A good example of the long range implications of what LaPierre endorsed back then, is the recent tragedy at Virginia Tech. Making schools a “gun free zone” where lunatics can murder with impunity, was his response to the Columbine shootings? What happened to advocating responsible carry, by responsible citizens??? ***** LaPierre also blessed gun show background checks by saying: "We will consider instant checks at gun shows when, and only when, this Administration stops (charging for NICS checks) and stops illegally compiling the records of millions of lawful gun buyers." The next day President Charlton Heston flatly said on ABC "This Week" that he was "in favor of" gun show background checks. Within weeks, bills for gun show background checks - and "youth gun access" bans - had been submitted in both houses of Congress! ***** First amendment rights? Was it the National Rifle Association that had ONE OF IT’S OWN MEMBERS, a pro-gun activist, ARRESTED at its national convention on, April 27, 2003 in Orlando, Florida for handing out PRO-gun freedom literature from an organization known as the Free State Project, Inc. The unlucky NRA member was Timothy Condon, a Marine Corps Vietnam veteran and Director of Member Services for the rapidly growing Free State Project. ***** It was NRA PRESIDENT Dr. C.R. (Pink) Gutermuth, who saw "no problem with gun registration," and was head of the Wildlife Management Institute, who became NRA President in 1973. Part of the problem began during the unlamented regime of former Executive Vice President Warren Cassidy. NRA lobbyists under Cassidy stopped opposing gun control bills and started offering NRA-approved versions of the same legislation. The NRA started WRITING ANTI-GUN LEGISLATION. Politicians were lobbying their colleagues for the so-called "instant check?" These pro-gunners were pushing a gun control bill that the NRA was strongly supporting. Jim Baker of the NRA was quoted by USA Today on October 26, 1993 as saying: "We already support 65% of the Brady bill, because it moves to an instant check, which is WHAT WE WANT." NRA spokesman Bill McIntrye said that the instant background check also in the bill "will be a victory for gun owners. From NRA Board member Tanya Metaksa. I think this agreement was a victory for those who see flaws in the current bill. This is a much different Brady bill. This bill sunsets into what we've been supporting for several years [the instant check]. If you look at it in the long range, IT‘S OUR BILL in five years. ***** Recently the NRA tried to derail a case in Washington DC. The “Parker v. District of Columbia” case. First by trying to have the case consolidated with NRA controlled litigation, which would have drug this case out for YEARS. When that failed, the NRA got behind, and was pushing for the “DC Personal Protection Act” bill, which would, in effect, remove the law that the “Parker v. District of Columbia” case was based upon. Thereby preventing the “Parker v. District of Columbia” case from going before the supreme court. Why would they try to derail a case that ultimately DID overturned a gun ban, and potentially settle the long disputed “individual right v. the right of the militia” to keep and bear arms? Because they said it was “too good” and might actually make it before the supreme court? A supreme court (considering the make up of it at present) where we have the best chance of them handing down a favorable ruling, than we have had in decades. With the very real potential, of the democrats gaining control in the next election (thereby giving them the opportunity to choose the next judges) if not now, WHEN? And when was the NRA fighting for our rights in this way? Oh ya…..2007. ***** Lets look at ANOTHER bill backed by the NRA. H.R. 2640, the "NICS Improvement Amendments Act” Admittedly, as always, there are some “supposedly” pro-gun people that are in favor of this. For me, to see the first red flags thrown up, are to look at who is sponsoring/co-sponsoring this bill. Carolyn McCarthy along with Barbara Boxer. Nevermind the far reaching implications, with the potential of opening a Pandora’s box, concerning the mental health issue regarding veterans, as well as anyone else that has seen some kind of mental issue. (children diagnosed with ADD? etc). The UNconstitutional NICS check should not be EXPANDED upon, in the first place. Oh, and this again IS happening in 2007 ***** Lets not forget the NRA BOARD MEMBER (Joaquin Jackson) who “indicated” that “assault rifles” should only be in the hands of the military and/or law enforcement. But since they ARE legal for civilians to own, then civilians should be limited to 5 round magazines. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think these assault weapons basically need to be in the hands of the military and they need to be in the hands of the police, but uh, as far as assault weapons to a civilian, if you… if you… it's alright if you got that magazine capacity down to five… -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** While reading the following, keep in mind that former NRA board member Russ Howard, RESIGNED from the board. His words, “In the past 5 years I've become increasingly concerned over NRA's penchant for giving UNDESERVED grades to politicians who TRAMPLE on the 2nd Amendment.” In California JOAN MILKE FLORES VS JANE HARMAN. 36TH CONGRESSIONAL Flores is an anti-gun Republican who voted FOR the Los Angeles Assault Rifle Ban. Harman is an anti- gun Democrat who got an “A” rating from the NRA. Why an “A” rating? She was ANTI-GUN!!! Who later said that she supports the assault weapon ban. CHRISTINE REED VS TERRY FREIDMAN (State Assembly) Reed was an anti-gun C-rated Republican Handgun Control Inc. member who had been mayor of Santa Monica. Reed who should have been an “F”. Freidman was an F-rated incumbent Democrat who authored many anti-gun bills TRICIA HUNTER: Hunter was state senator whose bid to retain office was based on high-profile attacks on "killer assault rifles". She was rated "A-" by the NRA. Howard Dean got an A+ from the NRA while governor, he supported the assault weapons ban and Brady bill. Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA). Did not vote when needed, but was helped by the NRA come re-election. Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA) voted FOR the brady bill (3 times) then was helped by the NRA come re-election. Congressman Elton Gallegly -- voted FOR the Brady bill and the assault weapon ban and got an A-, and an endorsement. NRA’s Terry O'Grady said, 'Gallegly voted against us on Brady and the Crime Bill, but he's always been with us before. We've decided to forgive him, give him an A- and endorse him. SAY WHAT? In Virginia, 15 legislators were given A ratings after they voted FOR both the one-gun-a-month ban AND the shotgun ban. 41 legislators who voted for either or both bans got A ratings. 7 got exceptional, "above the call of duty" ratings. In North Carolina, some districts have two senators. In the '94 elections, District 20 was represented by Ted Kaplan and Marvin Ward. Both favored assault weapon bans, handgun registration, and a one-gun-a-month ban. Their challengers were solid pro-gunners Ham Horton and Mark McDaniels (who fought tooth and nail for CCW). Nevertheless, ILA upgraded both anti-gun incumbents to "A" (one was initially a C), endorsed them, and supported them by mailing orange alert cards to NRA members in their district. Kaplan and Ward lost anyway, as incensed local groups like Grass Roots NC broke ranks with ILA and helped elect the pro-gun challengers. In NC in 1995, Senator Fountain Odom betrayed the 2nd Amendment by gutting the CCW bill in his subcommittee. The bill had come over in more or less tolerable format from the house. Odom fixed it so that only a few police instructors could give the mandatory training. NRA instructors were prohibited. He also worked to move un-permitted CCW from a misdemeanor to a felony, prohibit CCW with any alcohol "remaining" in the body, prohibit CCW in financial institutions, mandate that all training be fully repeated for each renewal, and gut statewide preemption. Limited preemption was restored in the full judiciary committee, but Odom betrayed us again, fixing it so CCW could be prohibited in any "park". Later on the floor, to give ILA cover, Odom amended the training section to allow NRA instructors to do the training. In 1996, Tanya Metaksa gave Odom an A, an endorsement, and an orange ALERT postcard mailing telling NRA members, "Senator Odom has demonstrated his commitment to our right to self-defense...Here's how you can help re-elect Fountain Odom -- a dedicated supporter of your Second Amendment rights. Help the campaign...make a contribution...spread the word to family, friends, and fellow gun owners... Sincerely, Tanya K. Metaksa." Odom's still trampling on our rights. Now he's pushing for a CCW liability law. In Virginia in 1996, extreme “F” rated gun grabber Congressman Jim Moran faced “A” rated, NRA life member John Otey. The American Rifleman carried the following message: "THIS IS YOUR OFFICIAL PRO-GUN BALLOT FOR THE FOLLOWING DISTRICT: VIRGINIA 8, US CONGRESS…..NO ENDORSEMENT" NO endorsement for an A rated NRA life member challenging an F- rated gun grabber??? In Virginia, 3 congressmen who voted many times against gun rights and supported the Lautenberg ban, kept their A+ ratings (part of a large club of turncoat A and A+ politicians). Tom Davis got an A after voicing support for Brady and the assault weapon ban and orchestrating a unanimous vote of support for the one-gun-a-month ban as a Fairfax County Supervisor. · In Pennsylvania (1993), then Republican Minority Whip Matt Ryan INTRODUCED an assault rifle ban. In 1994, he kept his A+ rating. In 2006, the NRA rated Ron Paul (arguably the MOST constitutional representative we have in office) with a “B” because he did not follow along in lock step, when the NRA endorsed (what Ron Paul saw) as an UNconstitutional bill. One that the NRA supported. Instead, they endorsed his UNproved, UNtested, DEMOCRATIC opponent. ******* John Dingell? The NRA’s Golden Boy? The former NRA Director? The same guy who voted in favor of the 1994 “Assault” weapons ban and then resigned from the Board of Directors the day after the vote? The same Dingell who received the NRA’s Harlon B. Carter Award, despite voting FOR an outright gun BAN? The same Dingell that coined the term "jack-booted thugs" when referring to the BATF? THAT Dingell? NRA Board of Directors member Larry Craig, was one of the co-sponsors of this bill, “Our Lady of Peace Act” Which was introduced by Caroline McCarthy, and supported by Chuck Schumer along with the usual band of anti Second Amendment slime like, Ted Kennedy, Blanche Lincoln and Richard Durbin. Don’t know what it is/was? Look it up. Can’t forget the “help” we got from the NRA. In the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.” Not debating, if setting this kind of precedent with legislation, protecting industries, is right. Not debating whether the industry needed this protection. The point here is, that there was a CLEAN bill (800) on the floor, AT THE SAME TIME. Everyone agrees that either bill (397 or 800) would pass through the senate, with no problem. So it depended on the house. There are always more votes than there are co-sponsors of a bill. S. Bill 800 had over 250 signed on as co-sponsors. MORE than enough to pass it, CLEAN. Why did the NRA CHOOSE to back the anti-gun laden bill, when there was a CLEAN alternative? For a true PRO-gun advocate, this was a no brainer. The NRA awarded Assemblyman Rod Wright its “Defender of Freedom” Award. This is the same Rod Wright who supported UNconstitutional limits on firearms purchases and background checks. This is the same Rod Wright who authored a bill to increase licensing fees from $3 to up to $100. Never mind the absurdity of bilking peaceable citizens of hundreds of dollars for making a constitutionally protected purchase. This champion of “freedom” apparently thinks it’s perfectly acceptable to license and charge Americans for exercising their rights. The NRA’s “Defender of Freedom” in 2001 voted against gun owners 62 percent of the time Deborah Danuski, a Democrat from Lisbon, was endorsed by the anti-handgun group, while also receiving an "A-" from the NRA on its report card of candidates. As a matter of fact, in Maine, both the NRA and Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence supported 18 of the same candidates! In Colorado, where the NRA supported Senator Wayne Allard for office, and even boosted his pro-gun lobby contributions to $37,000 since 1990, Allard stated flatly that he would support federal legislation requiring gun registration for private gun sales at gun shows. Is a legislator who wants to expand gun registration someone who stands up for the rights of gun owners? From Virginia, where the NRA Political Victory Fund touted the pro-gun “accomplishments” of Delegate Jack Rollison. This is the same Rollison who in a press release had the unmitigated gall to paint Gun Owners of America and the Virginia Citizens Defense League, who have endorsed his opponent Jeff Frederick, as extremists and “milita-esque” organizations. This is the same Jack Rollison who wants to ban your right to self-defense in any restaurant that happens to sell liquor. And this is the same Jack Rollison who voted correctly on only two out of eight issues important to Virginia gun owners. The NRA also gave their "Defender of Freedom Award" to one Kevin Mannix, who ran for governor here in 2002. In 1999 Mannix was the architect of the worst piece of gun control legislation in 10 years, in the Oregon House.[/FONT][FONT="][/FONT] |
[FONT="] [/FONT]
Savagedaddy19
Plinker
As a previous member of the NRA I have just stopped supporting them. I have sent several letters telling them that I would no longer send them my support due to the fact that they are using my rights like chess pieces in a game. I honestly think that Wayne needs to go. I don't send my money to them to get little gifts like a knife or cheap range bag. If I am going to send my money to an organization, I want them to use it to do something constructive (AKA. fight for the rights that they tell me they are going to fight for). Sadly I think that its just a way to line their pockets at this point. I say don't give them another dime until they start doing what they say they will do, and give your money to GOA. AT least they stand up and fight for our rights and don't back away from a fight that they don't think that they can win without at least giving it a real shot.
There seems to be a lot of opinion reported as fact in this thread. There is not a thing wrong with being skeptical. As a matter of fact, good for the skeptics. Please keep working to keep the NRA honest.
If we are being honest though, some might want to reexamine their brash suppositions, represented as fact.
If we are being honest though, some might want to reexamine their brash suppositions, represented as fact.
There seems to be a lot of opinion reported as fact in this thread. There is not a thing wrong with being skeptical. As a matter of fact, good for the skeptics. Please keep working to keep the NRA honest.
If we are being honest though, some might want to reexamine their brash suppositions, represented as fact.
Would you like to challenge any of the facts? I mean, if they really support repeal, and didn't really make all those statements in support of gun control, and really didn't support all of those anti-gun politicians, and really supported libertarians, and really opposed NICS, I'd want to know it.
Ahhh.
There it is. If there is anything I've learned here on INGO is that if you are not pure enough, you are not worthy.
Is that really what this is all about? Libertarian Purity?
Apparently it's now about red herrings.
Remember the "NICS Improvement Act"? HR 2640 in 2007.
The NRA supported it:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20070613/hr-2640-the-nics-improvement-amendm
Everyone else called it "Veteran's disarmament act."
https://www.oregonfirearms.org/12-21-07-hr-2640-the-nras-latest-victory
Larry Pratt -- Veterans Disarmament Act to Bar Vets from Owning Guns
Except the Brady Campaign who also supported it:
https://www.oregonfirearms.org/12-19-07-nra-and-brady-campaign-pass-gun-grab-through-senate
(sorry, the original post from the brady website is gone. I'm sure it's somewhere in an archive, but I'm not going to look for it right now.)
The NRA pats themselves on the back for their victory:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20080108/hr-2640
So does the Brady campaign
Then in 2017, they give us this gem:
NRA backed bill to protect second amendment rights of america's veterans.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...second-amendment-rights-of-america-s-veterans
Good job, NRA!!
I had already begun to drift away from the NRA at that point. This was the last nail in their coffin, for me.
The NRA supported it:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20070613/hr-2640-the-nics-improvement-amendm
Everyone else called it "Veteran's disarmament act."
https://www.oregonfirearms.org/12-21-07-hr-2640-the-nras-latest-victory
Larry Pratt -- Veterans Disarmament Act to Bar Vets from Owning Guns
Except the Brady Campaign who also supported it:
https://www.oregonfirearms.org/12-19-07-nra-and-brady-campaign-pass-gun-grab-through-senate
(sorry, the original post from the brady website is gone. I'm sure it's somewhere in an archive, but I'm not going to look for it right now.)
The NRA pats themselves on the back for their victory:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20080108/hr-2640
So does the Brady campaign
Then in 2017, they give us this gem:
NRA backed bill to protect second amendment rights of america's veterans.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...second-amendment-rights-of-america-s-veterans
Good job, NRA!!
I had already begun to drift away from the NRA at that point. This was the last nail in their coffin, for me.
BOOM! Diversion.
Kut has taught you well grasshopper.
Got anything worth discussing?
I was familiar with the rules of logic long before Kutnupe joined INGO. Perhaps you should familiarize yourselves with them as well. By following them, you may be able to avoid looking like, well, yourself.
Last edited:
Site Supporter
Members online
- Avi8tor
- billmyn
- nhgluff
- longbowhunter
- jim b
- phylodog
- Dr.Midnight
- Rescue912
- Simon6101
- NoAdmiration
- wisboy
- 04FXSTS
- TJ Kackowski
- alc1985
- steelhead
- Longhair
- Phil502
- gdun67
- Trebor657
- HKFaninCarmel
- ISP 5353
- rgw13
- joe138
- Rburney
- m4_dave
- Andyccw
- cakndsn
- mcapo
- Butch627
- UltraRick
- mmpsteve
- Hkindiana
- Leadeye
- Wolfhound
- Tradesylver
- El Conquistador
- COOPADUP
- drgnrobo
- JimmySlick
- fluffypanda
- Trading_Fool
- Squid556
- Defensive Shooting Concepts
- poohbee1
- Steelworker
- Nazgul
- jglevyjr
- BAgun
- OneBadV8
- Edged Tools
