NRA acted as a "foreign asset" for Russia ahead of 2016 election

Interesting that many Americans think that owning a gun is an achievement of some sort. All you have to do is have a bit of money. Or is it that a gun purchase is a lot of money for some folks? Maybe save your money for food and rent on the trailer?

Does having a firearm get you into the John Wayne club (His real first name was Marion, which is the name of a girl I dated once).

Does having a gun make you a patriot? Huh.

Go on with your bad selves. I grew up with guns, and we never saw them as tools to overthrow the government. We were all too busy serving in the Army or going to work. Maybe break out the guns for hunting season.

If we had trouble we took care of it like men - we walked outside and discussed it.

Gun owners who need a gun to solve problems are the gun problem.

a reply to: Erno86

All the right has now is insults on you.

It kills their soul to see a rightwing organization to go down in the flames of corruption. The NRA is self destructing from a greed and power struggle.


www.newyorker.com...

originally posted by: HanyManny
a reply to: Erno86

Yeah, and they are also big time shills. Who cares if a few kids get killed because of what we sell - we sell macho to old men in the US who feel powerless. They actually are, because if they use our product, they go to jail. Instant immersion into a system filled with minorities - the thing they fear the most.

#ProudlyProclaimYourIgnorance.

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: hyperlexic

And none of that matters when you can hit someone from miles away with a drone. The battlefield has changed. If there ever was a war against the U.S. Government and all you have are small arms, you're going to be outmatched to the point of absurdity.

We're talking satellite recon, thermal imaging, drone warfare and a lot of things the public doesn't even know about. Look, I support the 2nd amendment and own quite a few guns. But the idea that people can take on the government with a bunch of AR's is crazy.

They will be they guys barricaded in their houses like you see on the local news, where the State Police either smoke them out with tear gas or they shoot themselves. They are just nuts who are cranky. They should not have guns, and that is why they are worried about gun laws that restrict mental folks from harming themselves or others.

a reply to: HanyManny

Based on some of your posts I strongly doubt you had a lifetime membership.

============================

On topic, I think the NRA changed some years back and forgot what their mission was... that said plenty of 2nd amendment groups out there that remember and are still fighting the good fight.

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: hyperlexic

Yep thats exactly what russia wants. A well armed American population.

Probably so. The only people Americans kill with their guns are each other. It's not like anyone would stand a chance against modern armies.

It's not the Vietnam days anymore. A guerrilla force hiding out somewhere would be scanned by thermal imaging and have a missle placed right in the middle of them before they even heard the drone it came from.

Back to the OP, I think their support of the 2nd amendment is only secondary these days. It's been known for a while that their main purpose is to funnel foreign money to politicians.

You think a politician is gonna roll the American military out against the populace? Yeah, I can see a tank column rolling down main street, F-22s and F-35s overhead. That would be bad optics, and a miscalculation. Because you're asking soldiers to open fire on the very people they took an oath to protect, the average Joe and Jane they'd probably have a beer with on Sundays, for exercising a constitutional right. You'll get maybe 10% willing to do it.

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: hyperlexic

And none of that matters when you can hit someone from miles away with a drone. The battlefield has changed. If there ever was a war against the U.S. Government and all you have are small arms, you're going to be outmatched to the point of absurdity.

We're talking satellite recon, thermal imaging, drone warfare and a lot of things the public doesn't even know about. Look, I support the 2nd amendment and own quite a few guns. But the idea that people can take on the government with a bunch of AR's is crazy.

The US military will not fire on civilians so you’re an absolute idiot thanks.

originally posted by: PurpleFox

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: hyperlexic

And none of that matters when you can hit someone from miles away with a drone. The battlefield has changed. If there ever was a war against the U.S. Government and all you have are small arms, you're going to be outmatched to the point of absurdity.

We're talking satellite recon, thermal imaging, drone warfare and a lot of things the public doesn't even know about. Look, I support the 2nd amendment and own quite a few guns. But the idea that people can take on the government with a bunch of AR's is crazy.

The US military will never fire on civilians so you’re an absolute idiot thanks.

It's happened in the past. Remember Kent state? Or the Ludlow Massacre

time.com...


www.britannica.com...

a reply to: Erno86

" www.alternet.org... "


Really Man ? FAKE NEWS .........

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: PurpleFox

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: hyperlexic

And none of that matters when you can hit someone from miles away with a drone. The battlefield has changed. If there ever was a war against the U.S. Government and all you have are small arms, you're going to be outmatched to the point of absurdity.

We're talking satellite recon, thermal imaging, drone warfare and a lot of things the public doesn't even know about. Look, I support the 2nd amendment and own quite a few guns. But the idea that people can take on the government with a bunch of AR's is crazy.

The US military will never fire on civilians so you’re an absolute idiot thanks.

It's happened in the past. Remember Kent state? Or the Ludlow Massacre

time.com...


www.britannica.com...

Ah yes but history doesn't repeat itself.

a reply to: olaru12
Were they armed?
The people who stood with the bundys were.
The govt chose not to engage armed citizens.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: olaru12
Were they armed?
The people who stood with the bundys were.
The govt chose not to engage armed citizens.

They just assassinated levoy finicum after the showdown. Thats as bad as losing the fight then stabbing your opponent in the back as he walks away.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: PurpleFox

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: hyperlexic

And none of that matters when you can hit someone from miles away with a drone. The battlefield has changed. If there ever was a war against the U.S. Government and all you have are small arms, you're going to be outmatched to the point of absurdity.

We're talking satellite recon, thermal imaging, drone warfare and a lot of things the public doesn't even know about. Look, I support the 2nd amendment and own quite a few guns. But the idea that people can take on the government with a bunch of AR's is crazy.

The US military will never fire on civilians so you’re an absolute idiot thanks.

It's happened in the past. Remember Kent state? Or the Ludlow Massacre

time.com...


www.britannica.com...

Ah yes but history doesn't repeat itself.

And the military assisted at the Branch Davidian compound.

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: olaru12
Were they armed?
The people who stood with the bundys were.
The govt chose not to engage armed citizens.

They just assassinated levoy finicum after the showdown. Thats as bad as losing the fight then stabbing your opponent in the back as he walks away.

Yes they did.
It was vile.

a reply to: olaru12

Ome would be foolish to believe the military wouldn't do as They are ordered, as far as I understand it the military teaches soldiers to follow orders not question them.

a reply to: HanyManny

I am also a gun owner and I don't use my gun to solve problems.
I use my gun to protect myself and my family from those who would
do us harm.I also pray that I never have to use it on anyone.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: olaru12

Ome would be foolish to believe the military wouldn't do as They are ordered, as far as I understand it the military teaches soldiers to follow orders not question them.

Ah but they also tell them to be wary of illegal orders such as violation of the law about operating on US soil or acting as police.

NRA acted as a "foreign asset" for Russia ahead of 2016 election

Makes sense then that the NRA would want to fund his impeachment defense—for a favor.

Russian financing by proxy.

You can't make this # up.

Posted earlier here
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Closed.