Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
John Boy

BREAKING: The NRA Responds To President Obama's Gun Control Comments

Recommended Posts

Wayne LaPierre makes a lot of sense, but as an old, white, male he is an unsympathetic figure.  If the NRA wants to connect with the public, they need to have a woman saying the exact same thing.  Or a person of color, someone like Colion Noir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ Agree. I am sure they have women staff members who will be more than happy to deliver the message with little practice. Time for NRA to put women forward in their message. Bring moms with little kids who defended themselves or were victims of crime and wish they had the tool at their disposal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wayne LaPierre makes a lot of sense, but as an old, white, male he is an unsympathetic figure. If the NRA wants to connect with the public, they need to have have a woman saying the exact same thing. Or a person of color, someone like Colion Noir.

Doesnt Noir have some official title/ job with NRA.?

I agree with you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ Agree. I am sure they have women staff members who will be more than happy to deliver the message with little practice. Time for NRA to put women forward in their message. Bring moms with little kids who defended themselves or were victims of crime and wish they had the tool at their disposal. 

 

Dana Loesch, perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good response but it does the address the issue of confronting terrorist attacks. The NRA should be pushing for national conceal carry for all states.

 

So... you want the Federal Government to be at the helm of being the gatekeeper of National Carry? Once that's a federal law, the states will now be inhibited. Since so many states are currently in favor, I think giving that power to the fed may be a mistake...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in news from SCOTUS today, Justice Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts both voted to NOT hear the case of Highland Park IL's awb.

Only Justices Scalia and Thomas voted to hear the case, and it takes 3 justices for the 9 member court to take a case.

 

WTF is wrong with you Alito?

Are you changing your mind on Heller and MacDonald????

 

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Supreme-Court-assault-weapons-second-amendment/2015/12/07/id/704829/?ns_mail_uid=96396008&ns_mail_job=1645652_12072015&s=al&dkt_nbr=dbwyvi6d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in news from SCOTUS today, Justice Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts both voted to NOT hear the case of Highland Park IL's awb.

Only Justices Scalia and Thomas voted to hear the case, and it takes 4 justices for the 9 member court to take a case.

 

WTF is wrong with you Alito?

Are you changing your mind on Heller and MacDonald????

 

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Supreme-Court-assault-weapons-second-amendment/2015/12/07/id/704829/?ns_mail_uid=96396008&ns_mail_job=1645652_12072015&s=al&dkt_nbr=dbwyvi6d

 

FIFY.

 

And I sure hope he isn't changing his mind.....   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in news from SCOTUS today, Justice Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts both voted to NOT hear the case of Highland Park IL's awb.

Only Justices Scalia and Thomas voted to hear the case, and it takes 3 justices for the 9 member court to take a case.

 

WTF is wrong with you Alito?

Are you changing your mind on Heller and MacDonald????

 

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Supreme-Court-assault-weapons-second-amendment/2015/12/07/id/704829/?ns_mail_uid=96396008&ns_mail_job=1645652_12072015&s=al&dkt_nbr=dbwyvi6d

 

Or the conservative wing of the court doesn't think it has the votes to overthrow the ban. But with Alito, who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and it takes 3 justices for the 9 member court to take a case....

 

I believe it takes 4 justices to agree to hear a case. They usually deny cert without any written denial so this is a bit out of the ordinary. The others might not want to take a case if they don't think they have the 5th vote, Kennedy, on board. A denial of cert is much better than losing a case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess hope springs eternal, but IMHO, as I posted on another thread, its over as far as the Second Amendment and the Supreme Court is concerned.  The only hope for NJ as I see it is a conservative Republican win in 2016.  As someone mentioned above, a federal concealed carry law is what's needed.  It could impose training and background check requirements, but without may issue discretion.  If it didn't override less permissive state law it shouldn't be objectionable from a states rights view.  It would be completely justified as civil rights legislation, preserving 2A rights in states that don't recognize that right like NJ, and also relating to regulation if interstate commerce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although we all want our rights to be recognized now, this fight may take years or decades to get fully resolved. The Supreme Court can work very slowly.

 

We didn't get the 1896 Plessy separate but equal 7-1 decision to be overturned until the 1954 9-0 Brown decision. That was a very long wait.

 

Support the NRA, SAF, etc.

 

In the mean time NJ has the highest rate of people leaving than any other state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good response but it does the address the issue of confronting terrorist attacks. The NRA should be pushing for national conceal carry for all states.

 

Exactly! Now is the time...the public is primed.

 

Wayne LaPierre makes a lot of sense, but as an old, white, male he is an unsympathetic figure.  If the NRA wants to connect with the public, they need to have a woman saying the exact same thing.  Or a person of color, someone like Colion Noir.

 

Great point. Sorry to say, but the NRA had the image of old white fudds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... you want the Federal Government to be at the helm of being the gatekeeper of National Carry? Once that's a federal law, the states will now be inhibited. Since so many states are currently in favor, I think giving that power to the fed may be a mistake...

National CCW is not the point. Leave it with the states, but have the feds outline Maximum standards for Shall Issue and rule non-compliance to be Infringement, Nobody looses, free states are not required to heighten requirements, the states ruled by comrades the party must comply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...