NRA "Can be Considered" as another branch of the Military Industrial Weapons System

[Civic Justice]

I wrote this as a reply in another threat, but I'd like to discuss it more.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1017&pid=483896

I would like to engage discussion about just what is the NRA and how its connected to the broader system of Military Industrial Complex. We certainly need to stop treating it as if its a Governmental Organization and allowing it to have such public influence. Its a private organization, that should not have the power to usurp the voice of the people

Selling weapons be it domestically or internationally - they breed and feed conflict. They scour the world looking for conflicts, and playing both sides against each other, to sell more arms and expand and prolong conflict.

Domestically, the NRA is like a Terrorist Supply System.
The more contempt they can feed, the more arms they can sell, the more divisiveness they can sow, the more arms they sell.
They thrive on conflict and divisiveness as a marketing strategy. They know every sectors to incite with contention, to promote the climate to sell more weapons.
This is DOMESTICALLY done by the NRA and Internationally by the Broader Network of Military Industrialist. The NRA loves the Republican System, because they are known Agitators and Contention Makers, they need this groups to promote racial, ethnic and any other contempt and conflict and contentions, because it fits with their marketing strategy, so they pay politicians to promote any policy that will achieve the objectives of contention and arouse conflicts.

They sell more guns by such gaming being done against the America people. Democracy is an abomination to these weapon manufacturing and weapons selling organizations, because Democracy implies "equality and unity building" and equality and unity building, is not a good strategy for selling weapons.

It may well be why Democrats understand the need for regulations on weapons, and it may tell, why the Right Winger are so driven by the lusting for weapons.


What are your thoughts on this subject matter.

We have to remember, during the time the 2nd Amendment was written, it may have been necessary for everyone to have a gun, but as the Military became stable, and developed many branches, it was no longer necessary for people to have a weapons for the sake of defending State.
But now, we have many varied groups of Law Enforcement. I'm not against weapons for home protection, and I can understand weapons for people who are "hunters", as long as the hunters, are not doing it to mount animals heads on wall, but for the sake of "food". I am not an advocate of hunting for the sake of "sport", because I don't see a need to kill animals and call it a sport.

Maybe the young generation may find means to amend the Second Amendment with clarifications and modification, to take the broad ambiguity out of it, and classify what is a weapon category for home protection, and what is a weapon category for hunting.

[applegrove]

1. NRA exist to give the rural poor and lower middle class a reason to vote for republicans and tax

cuts that don't help them. While 'government not coming for your money' doesn't affect them, 'government coming for your guns' does. And so they get nudged, or boxed in, to voting for republicans.

[aikoaiko]

2. The NRA doesnt sell guns.

By some of their largest donors do and they sell their guns legally to nonprohibited people to best that NICS can screen. And those people want access to those weapons.

[USALiberal]

7. You are so predictable! Nt

[aikoaiko]

8. I think we are all very predictable about gun control on this forum

Almost 14 years now for me.

[spanone]

3. fuck the nra.

[HeartachesNhangovers]

4. I don't think anyone believes that the NRA is a branch

of the government, or treats them as such. Everyone knows that the NRA (actually an arm of the NRA) is a lobbying group. They function like any other lobbying group, by legally bribing or by threatening lawmakers with voter retaliation if they don't toe the line.

However, lobbying is the life-blood of US lawmaking. You can't restrict NRA lobbying without restricting all of the other lobbying, and I believe that lobbying activity, as the NRA and other groups do it, is well-protected by the law.

As far as the purpose and intent of the 2nd Amendment, that has been well-examined by the US Supreme Court. While it may be interesting to some people to research and think about original intent and how that intent should be accommodated today (it isn't very interesting to me), there's not much practical purpose to that after the Supreme Court decisions of the last few years.

[Civic Justice]

5. What is and what has been the voice of the people?

Regulation "the types" of guns, and ensuring that guns are in the hands of law abiding and sane people.

I am not "Anti Gun"... I believe in having a weapons for person protection, in the home but I don't need an assault style weapon for that, nor do I need one with a 30 round clip".

I don't know if we will ever become a society that is without guns, and with current day violence, we have much work to do in so many areas of society to even think to become such.

I never meant the NRA is the direct gun seller, but they represent the manufactures and markets that do.

It's a very big subject, and I'm inters ted in hearing the ideas and thoughts of people who want to share among the many who participate in these discussions.


Communication helps us find solution.

[AncientGeezer]

6. Why "types"...that's subjective, no? Who decides?

Who decides on "type" of speech? Who decides on a "type" of gender?
Who decides on sexual preferences?
Do you see the potential downside of judging by "types"?

[Civic Justice]

9. Not when we are talking about "citizen owned weapons"

If one remembers, the ban on the "Tommy Gun" ( 1934
The National Firearms Act of 1934, regulating the manufacture, sale and possession of fully automatic firearms like sub-machine guns is approved by Congress.

https://www.thoughtco.com/us-gun-control-timeline-3963620

We have historical precedence to ban guns by "type".

[AncientGeezer]

10. Except those "types" aren't banned...regulated.. yes...not banned.

[flamin lib]

11. Yeah, we need to fix that.

And as for ' what type' I suggest any semiautomatic with a removable magazine. Perhaps any firearm that can be fired quickly, like pump action and lever action as well.