It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NRA not charitable organization but a terrorist organization

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

The regulated part in the 2nd Amendment is about the militia and not about the right to own and bear arms...

Ignorant gun grabbers like yourself keep trying to push your authoritarian belief that you have a right to suppress other people's rights. But here is a fact for ya.... YOU DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO SUPPRESS OTHER PEOPLE'S RIGHTS...

But hey, what can one expect from left-wing authoritarians who still think "socialist/communist regimes are great and for the people?..."

BTW, as to the claim that "the NRA is a terrorist organization?..."

Planned Parenthood is the real terrorist organization that has murdered more Americans than all the casualties from world wars , and other wars the U.S. has been in... And now the numbnuts in the left are also legalizing the infanticide of newborns... in New York it is already a law, among other Demonrat states...


edit on 27-3-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.




posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

back when the constitution and bill of rights was written, you could own a cannon and military arms...sooo? Should rights change because technology changes?

The NRA is a charitable organization but contributions are not tax deductible.



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 09:43 PM
link   
I guess the most disheartening thing about those against the Second that try to reason that ownership is only for established militias and not for the individual seem to completely ignore...


Article 1, Section 8

The Congress shall have power...

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;


And of course



Article 1, Section 10

No state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops, or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another state, or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.


Which means neither the Federal nor State Government can have a standing army in times of peace. That in the form of a militia, is the sole province of the People. Which cannot exist without private ownership of firearms, ownership of ammunition and basic knowledge of their use with minimal proficiency. In other words be well regulated (working order) like a clock.

They ignore that fact, but so does the Federal and State Governments. And even Local Government if you consider the militarization of some police departments, least of which is full automatic weapons.

edit on 27-3-2019 by Ahabstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 06:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: neo96

I don't think that regulating which members of the population can arm themselves with which type of weaponry/arms is "infringement on the right to bare arms.

And, I don't see those two clauses, separated by a comma, not a period, as separate but equal statements. I see them as codependent and contingent on each other. The Founding Fathers weren't illiterate or grammar ignorant.



Make believe time.

Lets pretend Trump is as bad as you think.


This isn't about Trump, it's about the NRA. And, Trump is as bad as I think and probably a lot worse than I imagine.


We begin regulating who can own what.


Begin? Are you living in pretend time? The government has already regulated the type of weapons an average citizen can own.


And he, along with congress and the SC, decide to amend the bill of rights and put a regulation on firearms ownership. Only those that voted for Trump/republicans can own firearms. That''s pretty bad, right?


Indeed, you are living in a pretend time zone. Nobody is suggesting any such thing. We do, however, regulate what kind of weapons ordinary people have access to, and disallow some people to own weapons at all. And, we continue to regulate, for example, Trump's bump stock ban.



It doesn't matter that no one is suggesting it now, what matters is making sure we don't create an easier path for someone to come along at a later date and indeed suggest it, "for the good of the people"

And yes, we do those things. How well has that worked out?



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454




And yes, we do those things. How well has that worked out?


Well, personally, I'm glad that local police enforcement doesn't use military grade weapons and technology on its citizens. I'm glad that military grade weapons are generally kept out of the public domain. I'm good with background checks, and keeping guns away from violent felons and the mentally unstable.



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454




And yes, we do those things. How well has that worked out?


Well, personally, I'm glad that local police enforcement doesn't use military grade weapons and technology on its citizens. I'm glad that military grade weapons are generally kept out of the public domain. I'm good with background checks, and keeping guns away from violent felons and the mentally unstable.




What's military grade?

You mean like these?


Looks very kept out of the public domain.
edit on 28-3-2019 by Wardaddy454 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Aren't those the same type of weapons SWAT and other domestic, non-military law enforcement use now?

I know that Trump lifted the ban on transferring old military equipment to local police departments, but still, the military has better equipment than the police do. The police get the military hand me downs. Our military will never be outgunned by local police.
edit on 28-3-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 06:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Well, personally, I'm glad that ...


And right there is the ultimate "Who cares?" of this discussion... the United States Constitution was expressly written to remove the personal opinions of individuals from the forefront entirely. It hasn't always worked, as we've fallen victim to the tyranny of the masses on issues like prohibition, taxation, and allowance of nonsense like hate crime laws and affirmative action, but it works well enough to defend the system as the far better than any of the likely alternatives. It especially works well enough to defend it against feels at any and all costs.



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
I know that Trump lifted the ban on transferring old military equipment to local police departments,


You mean the ban his predecessor patted himself on the back over while simultaneously ignoring the ishnit out of it?
inthesetimes.com...


Our military will never be outgunned by local police.

The same military who was essentially stalemated in wars in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan (for a time) by scrubs outfitted with ancient Russian cast off weapons and makeshift armaments?



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

He asked my opinion, and I gave it. I didn't say "who cares". That's you putting words in my mouth, as you have an annoying habit of doing.


…. a 2017 study showed that police forces which received military equipment were more likely to have violent encounters with the public, regardless of local crime rates
en.wikipedia.org...


I care. But I don't care about your opinion of me.



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 07:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

You misunderstood me. I wasn't tagging you as saying "who cares," I was saying the US Constitution doesn't give a rat's hairy ass what your opinion or feels are, the document and every Right listed within it are freed from that pandering nonsense.



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

What pandering nonsense?

A well regulated militia is what the 2nd amendment calls for and what we have. PERIOD.

-off



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 08:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Pandering to people's emotions.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 09:57 AM
link   
And the rest of us will just look back blankly and move on with our lives.

I won't even bother telling you why you are wrong but instead agree they are further to the right from your wildly uninformed perspective but absolutely supportive of the Democratic Party, which has shifted far to the left in recent years.


From your perspective Castro is probably a centrist.



a reply to: dfnj2015



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Wikipedia actually has a good article on the NRA

The NRA was founded after the civil war to teach northern males how to shoot. Several union commanders believed that the better shooting skills of the south had prolonged the war by several years.

Up through the 1950s, the War department provided the NRA with old military rifles, to encourage marksmanship and familiarize civilians with army tech in case of war. They sponsored marksmanship contests between civilians and soldiers.

The NRA was an outgrowth of "Muster Day", an annual event in most of the original 13 colonies where all adult males had to appear on the village green and participate in rifle practice and small unit drill..

The NRA is a private, free-will organization, utilizing it's constitutional right of peaceable assembly. It does not advocate criminal acts, and the bulk of its money comes from the dues paid by members.

What does the NRA do, that the Democratic National Committee does not do?

Or is NY just going after them because they don 't support THE PARTY, or are otherwise traitors to the resistance?



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Aren't those the same type of weapons SWAT and other domestic, non-military law enforcement use now?

I know that Trump lifted the ban on transferring old military equipment to local police departments, but still, the military has better equipment than the police do. The police get the military hand me downs. Our military will never be outgunned by local police.


Way to sidestep my post.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: MetalThunder
Funny while the Left/Liberals go after a group that promotes responsible gun ownership and training, they rally around defending Planned Parenthood as a stellar charitable organization , the statistics show they are more responsible for dispatching lives than Guns are Statiistics



The do NOT promote responsible ownership at all when they promote absolute bans. Already violating Rights and ready to prove they mean it. That certainly says they do NOT promote any ownership but they promote people being defenseless. Several R's are on that team favoring restrictions and maybe even a few favoring confiscation.
edit on 29-3-2019 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Aren't those the same type of weapons SWAT and other domestic, non-military law enforcement use now?

I know that Trump lifted the ban on transferring old military equipment to local police departments, but still, the military has better equipment than the police do. The police get the military hand me downs. Our military will never be outgunned by local police.


Way to sidestep my post.


What post? Asking "what's military grade?" and then showing me a picture of random guys with machine guns? Why not show me a picture of Al Pacino and his "little friend" and ask the same question?

The local police are getting the military's hand me downs, partly because of domestic threats, like gangs, also have these weapons. But, the police are still getting older equipment. The military has better, more powerful equipment that civilians don't have access to, as it should be.

Those weapons in your picture have been normalized and integrated into our society. So no, those are no longer "state of the art" military grade weapons, in my opinion. Even though they still may be being used in some arenas, the public doesn't get access to the good stuff, the real military grade weapons.

That' probably not the answer you were expecting from "your post".





edit on 30-3-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Still "crawfishing" I see.

You CLEARLY need to educate yourself. We suspect you are and just don't care because the narrative isn't working for you gun grabbers.




top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join