As with firearms in particular, technology in general is neither good nor bad in itself. It’s up to the user to determine the moral character of the object.
I don’t accept the hopelessness found in claims that we can’t win over new people to the support of gun rights. If NRATV is to be replaced, and it needs to be, It should be a new inclusive vision
This is the lesson that many learned in elementary school that if you shout threats at a classmate, you don’t get to whine when he gives you a bloody nose.
Where there is a demand, there will be a supply, whether we’re talking about alcohol, Schedule I drugs, guns, or abortions.
Attacking the ability to participate in economic activity sets a bad precedent. Petition calls on credit card companies to freeze accounts that engage in “excessive, erratic gun and ammo purchases”…
I don’t know if the NRA can be saved. I do sincerely hope that it can.
Gun control advocates constantly declare that owning guns is a risk. The number of expletives that I use in reply depends on the day I’m having….
In a statement, a day after the mosque attacks in Christchurch, New Zealand attorney general, David Parker, clarified that semiautomatic rifles will be banned.
“We, New Zealand, we were not a target because we are a safe harbor for those who hate. We were not chosen for this act of violence because we condone racism.”
The lack of a repeated test to keep the “safety” standard up makes me suspect that the purpose of the DRLC document is much more about raising money for the county/state than about safety.
Orwell spoke directly to the concept of gun rights as a defense of democracy, both against external enemies and home-grown tyrants.
Millions of American gun owners did not commit that atrocity, and lashing out at us will not prevent crimes in the future
I expect to see Democratic candidates fall over themselves to present the purest image of a gun control advocate, and I equally expect that nothing in it will have anything to do with actual safety.
A bill in the New York State Assembly seeks to make purchasing more than twenty (20) rounds of ammunition for “assault weapons” in a one hundred twenty day period a felony.
What we can guardedly expect here is a recognition that the Second Amendment isn’t only for the home—in other words, “bear” is in the text, and we may finally see that part to be treated seriously.
An acceptable red flag law would emphasize the presumption of innocence, but gun control advocates only want to remove as many guns from private hands as possible despite the facts.
Gillette has come late to the discussion, and their contribution was a solid commitment to saying nothing new and nothing particularly challenging. So welcome to the party, Gillette.
Dealing with what creates demand, rather than sniping at the supply, is the sensible approach—if sensible means based on evidence and sound reasoning.
If gun-rights supporting liberals cannot find a place in organizations like the NRA, GOA, SAF then the exercise of those rights will be gone in short order.
The fight to protect gun rights is a coalition of the willing, not something that we can only do if we all agree on every plank of a particular party’s platform.
My purpose in this article is to offer some friendly advice from a supporter of gun rights who ideally would like to join the NRA, but at the very least wants success for the goals that we share.
Allowing law enforcement to pay attention to crimes that correlate with future escalations, would reduce a lot of violence.
The glee with which people who are opposed to basic rights discuss the murder of millions in pursuit of their goals should tell the country exactly why we must stop them.
The Versailles Treaty is reminiscent of today’s advocates to restrict gun rights in several ways.
They propose to require a trolling through of the last three years of a prospective gun buyer’s social media accounts before a gun sale will be allowed.