jump to last post 1-10 of 10 discussions (16 posts)

Has the National Rifle Association gained too much power and influence in Americ

  1. Xenonlit profile image60
    Xenonlitposted 5 years ago

    Has the National Rifle Association gained too much power and influence in America?

    Is it time to force the NRA to step out of the business of dictating our laws in ways that allow mass shootings? If no one pulls out the gun that they are allowed to carry and defends a crowd, then what good is the NRA's dogma, influence and policy?

  2. whonunuwho profile image80
    whonunuwhoposted 5 years ago

    The second amendment of the constitution guarantees Americans the right to "keep and bear arms". If there was no guns available the "Crazies" would use bombs and fire, or any other way so vial, to kill and maim, in their insane sprees. Taking away guns from the citizens of this country or others is not the answer to prevent mentally ill individuals from accomplishing their goals of terror. There would be more harm than good done if this came about. There will be more break ins, attacks on families and a reign of terror only comparable to WWII, if gun rights are removed.Policemen all agree that homes that are defended are safer and less crime occurs. The reason some do not pull out a gun to defend is that they may be shot by police thinking they are the criminals. The NRA is an outcome of needed self protection, and admittedly over zealous at times in its defense, yet necessary in order to help protect gun ownership in the U.S.A. Presidents have used it as a plus or minus in their platforms as candidates, just as education is always used and then discarded after the election. There is much more domination and total control of a people without the constitution in place!

    1. maddot profile image79
      maddotposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Australia has a 'no gun' policy and the "crazies" haven't taken to lobbing bombs.
      In one year deaths resulting from guns - Finland - 17, Australia - 35, Spain - 60, Germany- 194, Canada - 200 and the  USA - 9,484.

  3. DFiduccia profile image76
    DFiducciaposted 5 years ago

    Do the NRA have too much power? I personally don’t know, but I like guns. I don’t have any firearms but I use to own several before I moved to Mexico for eleven years. I had to get rid of my weapons because it’s illegal to own guns in Mexico, so only the criminals own them.  Now compare the murders in Mexico with the use of a firearm to the same circumstances in in the U.S.  Does the power of the NRA, which stands by our constitutional right to bear arms, cause more killings? I don’t think so, but at the same time, I’m not for any organization that promotes sport hunting. As far as mass murder is concerned, the people that are mentally unstable and want to kill are going to find a way to get a gun, just like the criminals in Mexico who often kill innocent bystanders.

    1. Xenonlit profile image60
      Xenonlitposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Forget hunting. No one cares about hunting. It's about mass killing. Saying that people are going to find a way makes no sense when we are handing them ways. We will stop the madness, one way or another.

  4. Credence2 profile image81
    Credence2posted 5 years ago

    Based on the recent tragedy in Colorado, my old stomping ground, I have to be concerned that the Second Amendment cannot be an absolute as the rightwinger would have us to believe. How does the right to self defense include possession of weapons where one may can decimate a small crowd?

    The right as always will spin this (NRA) saying that if the state would allow citizens to "right to carry" someone in the theatre could have shot the assailant before he got started..., Yeah sure, you can buy that along with your popcorn and soda drink.

    Yes, they have too much influence!

  5. Sue St. Clair profile image72
    Sue St. Clairposted 5 years ago

    If you are going to be fair, one needs to also ask if the ACLU, SEIU, and SPLC have too much power, money and influence as well.  Keep in mind that the ACLU has done its share in dictating laws and allowing things that the public at large do not want. The SEIU has used threats and extreme rhetoric to influence laws as well. I do not think any of these groups has too much power. They only have influence due to their members believing in the organization and what they stand for. Whether or not I agree with them, they are a reflection of the values of their members. Since I want my values respected, the values of those with other values needs to be validated as well. Silencing one group will end up silencing them all. It is scary to think that there are people who want to totally silence a vocal group standing up for what they believe is right.

    Your presumption that the NRA allows mass shootings borders on slander. Bear in mind that guns were banned where the shooting occurred. The use of gun bans do not work. Viewing the NRA as the cause is misleading. While you are blaming the NRA, why not blame the graduate school the shooter attended for not screening their students? Why not blame the theater for not allowing those with concealed carry to do something about it? In the coming days, there will be a lot more knee-jerk blaming done.

    Since guns were banned at the location of the shooting in Colorado, no one could have pulled out a weapon, except the criminals.

    1. Express10 profile image87
      Express10posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I am in total agreement.

    2. profile image0
      Larry Wallposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Everything from guns and women's rights, to education and old age are represented by special interest groups. The NRA concentrates on state legislatures where gun laws can be enacted. Congress is limited in passing gun laws because of the 2nd amend.

  6. profile image0
    Larry Wallposted 5 years ago

    Yes, the NRA has gained too much influence. I will not argue that other special interest groups also have excessive influence. However, nothing else in the constitution enjoys the "absolute" interpretation as the second amendment. I am not in favor of eliminating guns or preventing people from owning guns. I think reasonable limits should be set on limited the sale of advanced automatic weapons and armor piercing ammunition. I also think it would be reasonable to prohibit guns from places like college campuses and churches. If madmen come in with assault rifles, a few people carrying concealed weapons will probably be the first ones killed if their weapons are spotted..

    1. Express10 profile image87
      Express10posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I agree to disagree with you on this one. There are students who don't feel safe and are trying to get rules changed at their colleges so lawful concealed carrying is permitted. Those who wish to do harm will go where they know people are not armed.

  7. junkseller profile image85
    junksellerposted 5 years ago

    They are fanatics in my opinion. I really don't understand them. I don't see why we can't have an intelligent discussion about gun regulations. The ease with which you can get a tactical rifle like the AR-15 is disturbing. Anders Breivik, the Norway mass killer, also used a semi-auto tactical rifle. In the right hands, as we have seen, these are extremely effective weapons, capable of a very high-rate of sustained and deadly fire.

  8. maddot profile image79
    maddotposted 5 years ago

    As a non American  - the "second amendment" is the only US amendment I've ever heard of and the NRA is probably one of the few US orgnisations that I know anything about.
    Whenever the gun issue raises its head in the US it seems all we hear is  "the second amendment"..I wonder how comforting that is to the grief stricken familes..   
    and then pro gun lobby hijacks the whole disaster with its rightwing propoganda with no concern for those who have lost loved ones...every time there is a mass shooting in the US..you seem to have the same discussion then it quietens down until the next time...

  9. tirelesstraveler profile image80
    tirelesstravelerposted 5 years ago

    I believe this is an unfortunate time for you to politicizing this most horrible situation. We should be weeping for the family and friends of the people who were killed ; we should be praying for recovery for the people who are wounded. We should be praying for this young mans family and friends, who will carry wounds too. This shooting was perpetrated by a deeply disturbed young man.. 
    Criminals or moral people; which do you want to carry guns. 
    In California you have to take a safety test, and wait for 11 days until a background check is completed to see if you are fit to own a gun before you can have your purchased gun.  The government has data on every gun sold in the state for years on end.  Its the government and your elected officials that make laws.  The only guns they don't have control of are those stolen and in the hands of criminals.   If this man bought guns then something somewhere is flawed.

    1. Xenonlit profile image60
      Xenonlitposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      That was a pretty standard and unthinking NRA feed response. Politicizing? That doesn't even make sense. More guns will kill more people. We have had enough of the canned responses and will be doing something.

  10. Express10 profile image87
    Express10posted 5 years ago

    As for influence many groups have it. Of course this doesn't leave a warm and fuzzy feeling for observers. However, the NRA does not cause, allow, or promote mass shootings. That is an incorrect statement. Some see them as fanatics, that's their opinion but I can agree to disagree. As for individuals not defending a crowd in a mass shooting, it appears there were no law abiding owners in the crowds.

    My view on guns is certainly pro because I was raised in a home where my father had several. He had three girls and would do anything to protect us. We learned to respect guns from a young age, there was no toying around. He was a law abiding citizen all his life as everyone should be. Had he not had a gun to defend his family against a burglar, he, my sisters, or myself might not have lived past that night. Instead, he reacted swiftly and aggressively shooting the burglar and holding the garbage until police came to take him away.

    Just sharing my experience and opinion, no ill will intended.

 
working