The Least The NRA Could Do

[mrjarrell]

Dustin, at Dustin's Gun Blog makes a good point. Why should the NRA hold their conventions were the right to keep and bear arms is forbidden? Aren't they just rewarding the antis?

via Dustin's Gun Blog

While I'm sure Charlotte, NC was a beautiful location for the 2010 NRA Convention, the 2010 NRA Annual Meeting attendees who recently traveled there to celebrate the very freedom our Second Amendment protects were not actually free to exercise them. That's right, due to NC State law, convention attendees were met with Gun Free Zone signs at the doors, forcing them to either leave their guns in their hotel room if they were not unfortunate enough to have been staying at a Marriott, or leave them hidden away in their vehicles.

NC State law defines at least 10 different types of so-called "gun free zones" - places only criminals will be armed. In such government created gun free zones, all law abiding citizens are forced to become disarmed sheep ready for slaughter by any criminal armed with a knife, sword, gun, sling shot, broken bottle, or box cutters. In addition to preventing attendees from exercising their basic rights, the choice in location also provided unfortunate fodder for the anti-gun Violence Policy Center who never misses an opportunity to stretch anything they can into a far fetched lie.

Due to the fact that our freedoms are being restored throughout the United States at a rapid pace, would it be too much to ask the NRA to choose only locations for conventions where we can actually exercise our freedoms while we celebrate them? Why not reward the States with our tourist dollars that actually respect our rights? I believe the absolute minimum freedoms we should require at any location for an NRA Convention would be the freedom to bear arms openly & concealed in areas not serving alcohol, and either openly or concealed in areas where alcohol is served. I make that distinction only because some states require open carry where alcohol is served, while other states may require concealed carry in such locations.

More at the source.

 

[SSGSAD]

I wonder what Mayor B., would do, if the NRA wanted their show, here in Indy, when the Convention Ctr., is finished ?????

 

[mrjarrell]

I do believe the CC will be a victim disarmament zone.

 

[WhitleyStu]

Possibly 2nd Amendment's purpose was to be able to own firearms more than where you can carry them in privately owned buildings. Town hall meetings, at the time of the writing of the Constitution, were probably filled with gun carrying folks. Now we have to comply with the rules of convention centers where these meetings are held. I remember when you could carry into the Fort Wayne Gun & Knife show back when they were in the basement of the main building, but when the new Expo Hall was opened that all changed.

 

[Shadowbeach]

.

 

[dom1104]

Truthfully, this is why I don't attend many gun shows. I understand the argument for prohibiting (loaded) carry, but I'm of the mind that, if I can't carry, I'm not going.

Really?

For politcal reasons, or making a statement or somesuch?

Or do you actually feel that threatened by being at a gun show where you cant be armed?

I gotta be honest, so long as I have "something" like a good sized knife, or a can of OC, I feel pretty safe. Its 99% mental and staying alert.

I just wonder what you line of thinking is on this. I cant imagine NOT going somewhere I want to go, just because its a victim zone.

The gun cant run your life. Gotta add it to your "survival kit" when you can, but dont let it be your ONLY tool in your toolbox.

 

[Shadowbeach]

.

 

[Hornett]

Really?

For politcal reasons, or making a statement or somesuch?

Or do you actually feel that threatened by being at a gun show where you cant be armed?

I gotta be honest, so long as I have "something" like a good sized knife, or a can of OC, I feel pretty safe. Its 99% mental and staying alert.

I just wonder what you line of thinking is on this. I cant imagine NOT going somewhere I want to go, just because its a victim zone.

The gun cant run your life. Gotta add it to your "survival kit" when you can, but dont let it be your ONLY tool in your toolbox.

 

[88GT]

I wonder what Mayor B., would do, if the NRA wanted their show, here in Indy, when the Convention Ctr., is finished ?????

I do believe the CC will be a victim disarmament zone.

He supports victimization in city parks. Why would the Conv. Center be any different?

 

[USMC_0311]

Really?

Or do you actually feel that threatened by being at a gun show where you cant be armed?
I never feel threatened when I have my gun

I gotta be honest, so long as I have "something" like a good sized knife, or a can of OC, I feel pretty safe. Its 99% mental and staying alert.
Just because you "feel" safe doesn't mean you are.

I just wonder what you line of thinking is on this. I cant imagine NOT going somewhere I want to go, just because its a victim zone.
For me I can't imagine doing anything unarmed. We don't pick and choose the times we will need the gun.

The gun cant run your life. Gotta add it to your "survival kit" when you can, but dont let it be your ONLY tool in your toolbox.
The gun doesn't run my life, I run it and the the gun is the tool that ensures there is a life to run. I have other tools all so.

 

[22lr]

Making a mountain out of a mole hill.

 

[Thumper]

NRA only cares about where they can make money.They could care less about you and me unless we give them money.Even worse we have to meet their criteria.

 

[Manan]

Making a mountain out of a mole hill.

No sheet.

 

[Manan]

NRA only cares about where they can make money.They could care less about you and me unless we give them money.Even worse we have to meet their criteria.

Where would we be without them? Think, then answer.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Really?

For politcal reasons, or making a statement or somesuch?

Or do you actually feel that threatened by being at a gun show where you cant be armed?

I gotta be honest, so long as I have "something" like a good sized knife, or a can of OC, I feel pretty safe. Its 99% mental and staying alert.

I just wonder what you line of thinking is on this. I cant imagine NOT going somewhere I want to go, just because its a victim zone.

The gun cant run your life. Gotta add it to your "survival kit" when you can, but dont let it be your ONLY tool in your toolbox.

Dom, for me it has a lot more to do with not giving any of the money I work to earn to someone who will use it against me and against my rights.



Blessings,
Bill

 

[Prometheus]

Where would we be without them? Think, then answer.

A lot better off.

The nra has pushed for and supported nearly every major federal firearms restriction, rule and ban.

We would be much better off without them. The anti's know it and thats why they keep the nra in the headlines. They are their greatest allies.

It's like someone advocating enforcing the immigration laws and then joining La Raza. Ignorance or malice. Only two reasons.

 

[Thumper]

A lot better off.

The nra has pushed for and supported nearly every major federal firearms restriction, rule and ban.

We would be much better off without them. The anti's know it and thats why they keep the nra in the headlines. They are their greatest allies.

It's like someone advocating enforcing the immigration laws and then joining La Raza. Ignorance or malice. Only two reasons.

WOW you beat me too it.NRA approached the anti's about banning machineguns and that is what got the ball rolling.

 

[SavageEagle]

Dustin, at Dustin's Gun Blog makes a good point. Why should the NRA hold their conventions were the right to keep and bear arms is forbidden? Aren't they just rewarding the antis?

via Dustin's Gun Blog

More at the source.

I was reading the comments and read this one below. I have to say, it makes sense. A lot of sense. So to the poster of this comment.

11 comments:


Bitter said... I might add that you got those reforms largely after NRA held their convention there. Do you not want to afford citizens of other states the chance to show less-than-friendly politicians that we can bring money, reduce crime, and illustrate the error of their ways? You can't ignore that NRA had to get special exemptions for you to carry at the time.

Phoenix was a great convention city, and I do hope they return soon (as does everyone I know who attended). But, they also can't set records there in election years. They can do that in these other cities. Like the carry laws or not, that sends a message. (As an Arizona resident, you benefited from the message that breaking local records set, so I'm sure you can appreciate the federal message they try to send in big years.)

I'm opposed to returning to Charlotte only partially because of that issue. I think NRA had to make too many sacrifices on the facilities, so I just don't think Charlotte can work for future events.

But, to be completely honest, this post really kind of comes off as, "Hey, we got all the laws we wanted after NRA came here! That means they should come back and ditch those places that could also benefit the same way we did!"

I can see how that attitude is wonderfully helpful, especially to the NRA members in Wisconsin who used it as a rallying point for the "Dump Doyle" campaign specifically to get even basic concealed carry legislation. There are other examples of changes that happened after NRA hosted a meeting, and I don't think we should deny cities that have the facilities to hold the event the chance to reform their laws - unless they are so draconian that it interferes with the show itself or places someone who even travels in the state with a gun in danger. (aka, not Chicago or NYC)
Wednesday, May 26, 2010 8:26:00 AM MST

 

[OAK]

Where would we be without them? Think, then answer.

If I was a betting man, I'd say your a member of the NRA. The NRA started as a shooting program to fix the lack of marksmenship. Since 1990 it's been a full blown political agenda machine. Think about who's agenda their fighting for... While some of their programs receive my blessing, the NRA is still a foundation which relies on money.

This will give you something to think about: Look up the "Gun Control Act of 1968”. NRA lawyers actually helped to write that bill which is a near carbon copy of the Nazi German gun laws of the 1930s. Now they are trying so hard to abolish... Can you say waffle?

Also: The NRA “grades” politicians for their position on the Second Amendment. Hillary Clinton’s and Charlie Schumer’s protégé Kirsten Gillibrand got an “A” rating from the NRA. Check out her very left wing gun control ideals.

The NRA has enough members to not only stop any further erosion of our Second Amendment Rights, but to get rid of these unconstitutional assaults already on the books. The only thing that has been stopping this is the NRA leadership.

 

[lashicoN]

If I was a betting man, I'd say your a member of the NRA. The NRA started as a shooting program to fix the lack of marksmenship. Since 1990 it's been a full blown political agenda machine. Think about who's agenda their fighting for... While some of their programs receive my blessing, the NRA is still a foundation which relies on money.

This will give you something to think about: Look up the "Gun Control Act of 1968”. NRA lawyers actually helped to write that bill which is a near carbon copy of the Nazi German gun laws of the 1930s. Now they are trying so hard to abolish... Can you say waffle?

Also: The NRA “grades” politicians for their position on the Second Amendment. Hillary Clinton’s and Charlie Schumer’s protégé Kirsten Gillibrand got an “A” rating from the NRA. Check out her very left wing gun control ideals.

The NRA has enough members to not only stop any further erosion of our Second Amendment Rights, but to get rid of these unconstitutional assaults already on the books. The only thing that has been stopping this is the NRA leadership.

I've seen these points raised before and I also read Kirk Freeman's response for each point you raised. Hopefully he'll show up in here sooner or later to even the record out, or maybe he's tired of the same old fight about the NRA.

One thing I do know for certain, without anti second amendment gun laws, there wouldn't be the huge demand that there currently is for the NRA. They would go back to teaching people how to shoot rifles. If they are honest second amendment loving true Americans, this is what they want. If they are businessmen who like money more than true liberty, they won't work too hard to get rid of the "money maker" anti gun laws.