Herbologist said:

The lib media has gotta be so pissed that it all went peacefully

You know they wanted a violent outbreak that would have been a juicy story for them.

---

christopera said:

qman's point is that the NRA, is by proxy serving the citizens, when they promote gun sales. My point is that the NRA is representing gun manufacturers more heavily, and in doing so, is going against the best interest of gun hobbyists.

---

qman said:

Isn't attempting to keep gun companies in business the same as protecting the purchasing of guns for citizens?

---

christopera said:

qman said:

christopera said:

So if the companies raise their prices to $1M per gun, then you've protected the right to buy guns?

No. Stop being daft. You are always bitching about the elite. This is a perfect example of the elite running a top down approach to "protecting gun rights" when in reality if that they were interested in that they'd be working with communities and building reliable relationships so that gun owners aren't alienated. They aren't doing that though.

---

Gun companies set a price for their guns to maximize profitability, that's what the shareholders demand. If they can hike the price without hurting sales, that's what they'll do. It's no different than selling potato chips.

How are gun owners alienated and why should gun companies be working with communities? The only thing gun companies need to serve are their customers.

---

qman said:

christopera said:

You aren’t saying anything.

---

You're making generalizations and when questioned on it, you ignore it. 

You do realize that the NRA can serve the gun companies and their members at the same time by promoting the same exact agenda?  Just because the gun companies benefit from their pro-gun movement, it doesn't mean that gun right advocates don't also benefit as well.

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

christopera said:

You aren’t saying anything.

---

Based on the arguments thus far, I'll take qman's side on this in that I haven't seen any evidence of the NRA "artificially picking companies for your gun lobby to back" and I think it is definitely best for the NRA's bottom line to protect everyone's right to purchase arms.

Though frankly, I don't care about gun laws one way or the other.

---

qman's point is that the NRA, is by proxy serving the citizens, when they promote gun sales. My point is that the NRA is representing gun manufacturers more heavily, and in doing so, is going against the best interest of gun hobbyists.

The problem is that NRA is not a consumer group, it's an industry group that takes donations from consumers. This is proven by the fact that the gun industry makes the bulk of its revenue from military side sales, meanwhile the majority of the NRA's funding comes from those same corporations. So, who is the NRA's customer then? Well, the NRA has ignored it's citizen members time and time again. Approximately 80% of citizens that donate want mandatory background checks ( https://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2018/feb/27/tim-ryan/after-parkland-shooting-ohio-congressman-said-70-8/ ). Yet, despite their citizen member preference, the NRA opposes this ( https://www.nraila.org/get-the-facts/background-checks-nics/ ). Why could that be? Their largest contributors don't support background checks.

Meanwhile, Virginia loses it's Republican leadership, the very state that the NRA is based in. Additionally, Republicans lost that state while the Democrats ran on a heavy gun regulation platform. So, we potentially have a chipping away of the gun rights the NRA wants, i.e. no background checks on private sales. Despite that it's citizen members want that, all while Virginia elections favor similar plans. So in summary, the rules creep is not only in favor of those who wants more checks and balances on gun owners, but it's what the NRA's own members are saying they want. How is the NRA's opposition to it's citizen membership helping them? Unless they are all seeing, it seems the NRA's motivations aren't there to protect their citizen member's desires at all.

Here's a few more points;

• Trump supporters often want stricter background checks (unlike the NRA) - https://www.businessinsider.com/nra-warns-trump-against-backing-gun-control-background-checks-report-2019-8
  
• Even wastes of space like Pat Toomey (R) have supported backgroudn check bills - https://www.pennlive.com/midstate/2013/04/pennsylvania_gun_laws_pat_toom.html
  
• The NRA is broke so it must accommodate it's largest contributors (not citizen members) - https://nonprofitquarterly.org/monies-from-nra-membership-dues-drop-according-to-latest-audit/
  
• NRA citizen members are the real losers of the NRA's infighting - https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/editorial-its-time-to-de-fund-the-nra/
  
• NRA spending practices - https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/nra-money-flowed-to-board-members-amid-allegedly-lavish-spending-by-top-officials-and-vendors/2019/06/09/3eafe160-8186-11e9-9a67-a687ca99fb3d_story.html
  
• There are more guns than people in the USA, and our population is 23% children, will more guns helps gun hobbyists -https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/19/there-are-more-guns-than-people-in-the-united-states-according-to-a-new-study-of-global-firearm-ownership/
  

Again, simply promoting gun sales does not mean that you are doing what is best for gun hobbyists. If that were the case, the NRA's citizen members wouldn't be trying to promote greater checks/barriers on gun sales.

---

Quote:

The lib media has gotta be so pissed that it all went peacefully

You know they wanted a violent outbreak that would have been a juicy story for them.

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

christopera said:

qman's point is that the NRA, is by proxy serving the citizens, when they promote gun sales. My point is that the NRA is representing gun manufacturers more heavily, and in doing so, is going against the best interest of gun hobbyists.

---

Thanks for the explanation.  I see where you're coming from on this, though I was agreeing with the following point from qman:

qman said:

Isn't attempting to keep gun companies in business the same as protecting the purchasing of guns for citizens?

---

Whether or not the NRA pushes for background checks or not, as you've said most people want, I still believe they are protecting citizens' purchasing rights to buy guns, as qman said.

I guess I think you're arguing two different points, but I'll let qman chime in if he wants.

---

Psilynut2 said:

Quote:

The lib media has gotta be so pissed that it all went peacefully

You know they wanted a violent outbreak that would have been a juicy story for them.

---

  Yes your right , the lack violence and no one being killed makes it different than the last big Nazi rally that comes to mind . It was a goose step in the right direction for y’all for sure .

---

qman said:

The NRA isn't "broke" so that's a false narrative. The key issue here is, do NRA members care more about background checks or having access to guns?  I think we both know that obvious answer.

You're getting way to caught up in these polls and not really quantifying the importance of the issue for NRA members.

If what you're attempting to make a case for is true, the NRA should be out of existence in the next few years. I don't see that happening at all.

---

qman said:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

christopera said:

qman's point is that the NRA, is by proxy serving the citizens, when they promote gun sales. My point is that the NRA is representing gun manufacturers more heavily, and in doing so, is going against the best interest of gun hobbyists.

---

Thanks for the explanation.  I see where you're coming from on this, though I was agreeing with the following point from qman:

qman said:

Isn't attempting to keep gun companies in business the same as protecting the purchasing of guns for citizens?

---

Whether or not the NRA pushes for background checks or not, as you've said most people want, I still believe they are protecting citizens' purchasing rights to buy guns, as qman said.

I guess I think you're arguing two different points, but I'll let qman chime in if he wants.

---

The polls don't measure the level of importance for the NRA members, correct?  If it's so important to the members, they can just quit the organization if they feel they're not getting the proper representation on the issue. In my opinion, despite the polls numbers, it's NOT that important to NRA members.

The number one issue for NRA members is access to guns, NOT background checks. The poll statistics do not take that level of importance into account for obvious reasons.

---

christopera said:

qman said:

The NRA isn't "broke" so that's a false narrative. The key issue here is, do NRA members care more about background checks or having access to guns?  I think we both know that obvious answer.

You're getting way to caught up in these polls and not really quantifying the importance of the issue for NRA members.

If what you're attempting to make a case for is true, the NRA should be out of existence in the next few years. I don't see that happening at all.

---

Do you have any sources, or is it a false narrative?

---

christopera said:

qman said:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

christopera said:

qman's point is that the NRA, is by proxy serving the citizens, when they promote gun sales. My point is that the NRA is representing gun manufacturers more heavily, and in doing so, is going against the best interest of gun hobbyists.

---

Thanks for the explanation.  I see where you're coming from on this, though I was agreeing with the following point from qman:

qman said:

Isn't attempting to keep gun companies in business the same as protecting the purchasing of guns for citizens?

---

Whether or not the NRA pushes for background checks or not, as you've said most people want, I still believe they are protecting citizens' purchasing rights to buy guns, as qman said.

I guess I think you're arguing two different points, but I'll let qman chime in if he wants.

---

The polls don't measure the level of importance for the NRA members, correct?  If it's so important to the members, they can just quit the organization if they feel they're not getting the proper representation on the issue. In my opinion, despite the polls numbers, it's NOT that important to NRA members.

The number one issue for NRA members is access to guns, NOT background checks. The poll statistics do not take that level of importance into account for obvious reasons.

---

Members are quitting, that's why the NRA had to take a loan of like $5M from the NRA foundation to stay afloat. It's right there in my post from before.

---

Herbologist said:

Psilynut2 said:

Quote:

The lib media has gotta be so pissed that it all went peacefully

You know they wanted a violent outbreak that would have been a juicy story for them.

---

  Yes your right , the lack violence and no one being killed makes it different than the last big Nazi rally that comes to mind . It was a goose step in the right direction for y’all for sure .

---

Rhizohunter, listen, as much as you hate gun owners and want them to be Nazis.  Its not how it is for 99% of them.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

---

Herbologist said:

The lib media has gotta be so pissed that it all went peacefully

You know they wanted a violent outbreak that would have been a juicy story for them.

---

koods said:

PreparationH said:

Ah, Virginia gun control really poked the bear, thankfully.  Trump is tweetin support saying this is what happens when democrats win etc. 

---

I don’t know if you noticed but the republicans lost control of virgjnia and you can thank the gun nuts for that.

Gun control was the major issue in the last election and you guys lost. Virginia gun nuts yelling that the democrats will take away your guns and the people of virginia said “that’s cool with me.”

This rally was a great opportunity to round up some domestic terrorists too. Win win all around.

---