The National Rifle Association

[Crazyswordsman]

The Second Amendment was created for a reason. The NRA has warped that reason and turned it into an excuse for doing things that would otherwise be inexcusable. I first wanted to see the NRA shut down after I saw that it opposed a bill that would ban cruel puppy mills, which has nothing to do with gun ownership. That alone is enough for me to want the NRA to be shut down because puppy mills are almost universally recognized as a no-no. Now they're trying to force bars to sell alcohol to people carrying loaded guns.

It always irks me how some people continue to express support for racial profiling and limiting speech at airports, support for raiding peoples homes to look for bomb making equipment without a warrant and holding suspects without a warrant but is more than happy to let these same people carry guns around and go trigger-happy. -CSM

[Booyakasha]

I'm in the NRA. I'm a certified range instructor, too---part of my summer job.

I'd say I'm offended (or possibly even 'irked') by that cute little NRA member strawman/caricature you just whipped up, but all it really makes me do is wonder if you actually know anyone in the NRA.

[Crazyswordsman]

^I'm talking about its leadership. Notice the first link I put in was to an actual NRA site (aka a primary source). I didn't criticize any rank-and-file members of the NRA, just the leadership. -CSM

[Booyakasha]

Fair enough. I'm sure you see where I'm coming from, though---if people are going to have firearms, it's better they be trained in responsible handling and safety rather than being left to their own devices. The NRA is a tremendous educational resource there, both in terms of expertise and sheer financial support.

[I REALLY HATE POKEMON!]

Originally Posted by Crazyswordsman

It always irks me how some people continue to express support for racial profiling and limiting speech at airports, support for raiding peoples homes to look for bomb making equipment without a warrant and holding suspects without a warrant but is more than happy to let these same people carry guns around and go trigger-happy. -CSM

RACE - Resources -Glossary

racial profiling: the use of race (and often nationality or religion) to identify a person as a suspect or potential suspect. Racial profiling is one of the ways that racism is manifested and perpetuated.

Um, so when we're dealing with terrorism realistically, we should suspect everyone equally or what...? We have to gouge out our common sense in exchange for maximum political correctness?

[Crazyswordsman]

Originally Posted by Booyakasha

Fair enough. I'm sure you see where I'm coming from, though---if people are going to have firearms, it's better they be trained in responsible handling and safety rather than being left to their own devices. The NRA is a tremendous educational resource there, both in terms of expertise and sheer financial support.

I'm sure there are plenty of organizations that preach responsible gun ownership and advocate for gun rights in a manner that don't lobby for the right to have a gun while you're drunk or lobby on matters completely unrelated to the Second Amendment. -CSM

[Booyakasha]

You're taking things well out of context on the 'guns in bars' thing. And, inasmuch as the 'puppy mills' bill refers to hunting dogs several times, it doesn't take much of a mental leap to see the NRA (the preeminent hunters' rights group in the country) getting involved.

And no, there really isn't that great a variety of gun advocacy groups to choose from. Not if you want one with reach, influence, and resources, that is.

[Cosmonautical]

Originally Posted by I REALLY HATE POKEMON!

Um, so when we're dealing with terrorism realistically, we should suspect everyone equally or what...? We have to gouge out our common sense in exchange for maximum political correctness?

Past events should be used in caution to gauge future possibilities, but turning a wary eye to what you expect will leave open what your expectations did not cover. Race is not a key factor in identifying beliefs or background, it's got no causal relationship.

If you drive on a street, and four consecutive manholes are construction zones that you slow at, you do not slow at any remaining manholes simply because the previous ones were. You read the signs which are actual indicators of information.

[ZeldaGirl]

That is a brilliant and pithy analogy. Much better than what I was planning to say in response - well done, sir.

[Kargath]

Originally Posted by FALCON PAUNCH

Past events should be used in caution to gauge future possibilities, but turning a wary eye to what you expect will leave open what your expectations did not cover. Race is not a key factor in identifying beliefs or background, it's got no causal relationship.

If you drive on a street, and four consecutive manholes are construction zones that you slow at, you do not slow at any remaining manholes simply because the previous ones were. You read the signs which are actual indicators of information.

Race does not determine a person's beliefs, but to say that it's not a key factor for identifying beliefs or background is simply wrong. Just by knowing a person's race and location can help me guess the quality of their education, their income level, strong cultural influences in their life, and more. Race is most definitely something you can use to identify likely attributes about a person.

What needs to be kept in mind is the weighting. For example, a particular racial group's mean intelligence factor may be provable to be slightly lower than others. There are so many other factors that weigh more heavily on the final outcome (nutrition, education etc) that to judge mainly by terms of the person's race means you'll almost certainly be lead astray.
In the case of terrorism, you may be slightly more likely to find a terrorist by random selection if you weight the selection to a particular racial group, but there are other more important factors like "they keep looking at the security guards".

[Crazyswordsman]

Originally Posted by Booyakasha

You're taking things well out of context on the 'guns in bars' thing. And, inasmuch as the 'puppy mills' bill refers to hunting dogs several times, it doesn't take much of a mental leap to see the NRA (the preeminent hunters' rights group in the country) getting involved.

And no, there really isn't that great a variety of gun advocacy groups to choose from. Not if you want one with reach, influence, and resources, that is.

There are plenty of ways to get hunting dogs other than from a puppy mill. Puppy mills are cruel and abusive. You can get hunting dogs from many other sources (breeding, rescuing, etc). And the NRA should be a Second Amendment advocacy group; anything that extends beyond that reach, such as animal issues, shouldn't matter to them. The Second Amendment is a license to defend yourself, not to fire at will.

The NRA has become too powerful. I know gun owners who don't like the NRA. Hunters actually, especially from rural areas, who disagree with a lot of what the NRA does. -CSM

[Cosmonautical]

^^ You write that like I meant race can't provide partial context, to clarify information, which isn't at all what I said. I implied that the mistake would be to effectively assume that all of your assumptions were flawlessly informed, and follow them without regard to the possibility of an absence of knowledge. When you're looking for unidentified persons, whom are involved in a certain idea, whom are occupied in an attention-avoiding plot to compromise the security of your country, their racially-identifiable physical appearance is moot as an identifier. It's in their foremost interest to avoid coinciding with your assumptive racial profile, and they will be aware of their interests.

[Saria Dragon of the Rain Wilds]

Originally Posted by I REALLY HATE POKEMON!

Um, so when we're dealing with terrorism realistically, we should suspect everyone equally or what...? We have to gouge out our common sense in exchange for maximum political correctness?

Look, I know what you think you're getting at. A few points, though:

Racial profiling doesn't work. While you, and people like you, are busy watching out for "those Easterners", people like Jihad Jane will (even while displaying warning signs) be ignored in favour of others who are harmless and innocent but were a certain race.

You don't have to "look the part" to be involved in something. Take the murder/assassination of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, where the suspects all looked like average people, mostly white, supposedly linked with, or agents of the Mossad. Other organisations, including terrorists, can use tactics just like that: blend in. Find people who look like normal US citizens. You can't rely on appearances alone, that would be dangerously foolish, and it's why the security isn't supposed to.

Terrorism isn't confined to the Middle East. I don't know how accurate this is, but have a quick glance at the "Global Terrorist Incidents" for 2000. It might be perceived that the greatest threat to the US currently comes from the Middle East, but it would frankly be an endangerment of lives to focus on any single nationality or race as potential terrorists. "Don't put all your eggs in one basket".

Approximately 29,000 commercial flights occur daily in the US. Do you have any reasonable way to fathom the amount of people that are going through airports? There needs to be wide-ranging, accurate security in place to protect those thousands of flights. This isn't something as simple as "THAT GUY IS THE RACE WE'RE WATCHING OUT FOR" because that leaves so many cracks for other "bad guys" to fall through, it would be totally irresponsible.

Finally, racial profiling is literally racism. Literally. You are setting someone apart solely and specifically for their race. Racial profiling is what people do when they think all Mexican and Latinos are illegal immigrants, stealing jobs from the "real" Americans, or that blacks are less intelligent and shouldn't be hired. Racial profiling is what people are doing every time they distrust someone of Eastern appearance, because there are some known terrorists, so they perceive the whole region as a threat. It's blind.

ps. Oklahoma City Bombing.






Now. As for the NRA, in principle, they are a necessary kind of organisation to educate people about the guns they are allowed to have in the US. I don't see why they are part of much anything political, since they are primarily meant to be a gun association. The only fight I can reasonably imagine them having is to retain their lawful ownership of weapons, if and when it comes up. Anything else seems like alterior motives from people within the association, and they might be using the size of the association to back their ploys. *shrug*

[Booyakasha]

Uhhh, no, CSM, the NRA shouldn't be merely a second amendment advocacy group. Because it has always been concerned foremost with training people in the safe and effective handling of guns. Like, that's the actual reason it was organised---Union officers were disgusted with their troops' dismal shooting, so, after the war, they put together an organisation that would encourage citizens to have a degree of familiarity and efficacy with firearms. Second amendment advocacy didn't even exist until gun control advocacy appeared.

[Metal Man]

I think mostly what needs to be separated here is the NRA as an organization and the NRA's lobbying behaviors, which primarily involve diluting any and all gun laws, and then trying to destroy candidates and bills which try to establish gun control laws.

It's just rather ironic that a group which touts the possession of handguns as freedom against tyranny spends its time having a tyrannical effect on legislators who 'dare' oppose the idea of everybody and their brother being allowed to pack fully-automatic assault rifles 'cuz they visited some firearms show.

Most of the people of the organization itself don't bug me, but whatever part of it which causes them to do loopy things like sneak in amendments about allowing handguns in parks is fair game, in my mind.

Additionally, it's a fallacy to make the idea that because one or two VGF members are NRA members, we can't insult the NRA because that would be insulting them. One can belong to an organization which is disliked without taking the blame for it or being included in insults directed at said organization; and might I add that such behavior of trying to guilt people out of criticizing the NRA over that suggests there is more to criticisms of it than it would appear.

METAL MAN FROM TEH FUTUR SAYS: Apparently there wasn't anything to it after all except POing Boo over my own imagined idea of what his earlier line meant. Whoops. You can safely consider that strike-through'd statement retracted.

Finally, it's a missing the point to insist that one cannot attack the lobbying efforts of the NRA without attacking the people who train others how to shoot. They're two different things.

I can understand why it being placed in 'Things that suck' forum would probably irritate those in the NRA or in favor of it, but honestly, somebody always dislikes something. Somehow I doubt CSM's intent was to directly attack you, IRHP and Boo, yet both of you act that way.

Which is ridiculous, as I doubt you're the ones lobbying for guns.

[Zaden]

Half of your links don't even mention the NRA.

I browsed some articles on puppy mills. The problem seems to be a simple lack of care and consideration for the animals, not the basic premise of breeding canines. Isn't there some alternative to these 'mills', like breeders with nice facilities that actually take good care of their dogs? (This doesn't include forcing them to reproduce a number of puppies beyond what is healthy for the progenitor dogs.)

[CaptHayfever]

^Yes, actually, there are lots of alternatives to mills. CSM mentioned some of them.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

[Zaden]

*looks again*
aauuhh... don't see it

"(breeding, rescuing, etc)" is exactly what I was looking for when I asked the question.

[Speed]

Now they're trying to force bars to sell alcohol to people carrying loaded guns.

Actually that's called robbery, been around for awhile now.

[Crazyswordsman]

Originally Posted by Metal Man

I can understand why it being placed in 'Things that suck' forum would probably irritate those in the NRA or in favor of it, but honestly, somebody always dislikes something. Somehow I doubt CSM's intent was to directly attack you, IRHP and Boo, yet both of you act that way.

My targets are the higher-ups in the NRA. This is like me opposing the war and/or the actions our army is doing, which would be something like me bashing the commander of the armed forces or the head of the CIA or something like that. I would never bash the individual NRA card carriers just like I would never bash an individual soldier. It's the cabal at the top that's the problem, not the rank-and-file people themselves. If Boo and IRHP want to own guns or teach people to use them, that's perfectly okay with me, and even if it wasn't I don't have a right to tell them what they can and can't do because the Second Amendment says I can't. -CSM