Boys, I watched with interest the past several days the events in Canada unfold, as many did. In the news coverage they showed a video of a "terrorist" pleading with underlings to "use whatever means necessary to kill the infidels in Australia and Canada." Now, many would say this is because they recently announced support of our coalition battling Isis. I think they specifically mentioned these two countries because they have very stringent gun laws aginst private ownership of guns and would present basically a "soft" target (to a degree). Australia, a coupla years back, had a mandatory turn in gun program.

I am not picking on either of these two wonderful countries. I just think if it weren't for strength in numbers (read/insert here NRA) there may have been USA at the top of the list. I feel very badly for all involved in the attacks. No country deserves this!

My purpose here is to maybe draw some attention to "a well regulated militia------------". Oh, it will happen here. I am not niave enough to think it won't. But when the scumbag mentioned "Australia and Canada", I think even he had a method to his madness. When it happens here I don't think it will be a "prolonged" event.

Think about joining the NRA if you are not a member, and donating a tad more if you are.

__________________
Bill
Dis B. Leaf

The Canadian police that responded were very well armed; M-16s, MP-5s, and Sig pistols. If a civilian with CCW responds he is likely to get mistaken as a shooter and get taken out.

I'm not saying don't respond but once the cops arrive you better disarm and get down in a hurry.

Join, Contribute, Support the NRA....there IS strength in numbers.....

__________________
There's nowt so queer as folk

"We cannot invade mainland America; there will be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

It was well known 73 years ago and I believe it still is. The NRA is the reason why this quote still applies.

__________________
LIVE FROM THE DAWGHOUSE

That quote rings truer now than ever before. In past wars, we all knew the North Koreans, the Viet Cong, and Saddam Hussein's troops would not invade the U.S.. This type of bad guy is different, and the armed citizen is what will keep this country safe should they try more of these random acts of violence.

im very proud of the NRA protecting our rights if it wasnt for them we wouldnt have any

IMO, the NRA can get annoying at times, but it's still the best tool in the box.

__________________
Isaiah 41:10

If it were not for the NRA the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 would have become law. 157 types of guns banned, ban on private sales, ban mags over 10rds, government mandated storage....

Gentlemen, that is the world we'd be living in today without your support of the NRA.

I'm a Life Member of the NRA, and was a regular annual member for many years before becoming Life. I truly do not understand any serious gun owner, or any citizen who believes in the Bill of Rights, who does not join the NRA unless they are truly unable to afford the membership fee. I don't agree with everything that the NRA does, but it unquestionably is the strongest bulwark against the loss of our 2nd Amendment rights that exists in this country today.

As an aside, in the Canadian shooting case, why has it not been touted that here is a good example of how a good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun? I read that the Sergeant at Arms position in the Parliament used to serve unarmed, but now carries a pistol routinely. Who knows how badly this all might have gone had this not been the case, and had not the Sergeant at Arms been willing and able to stop the terrorist.

Bottom line right here, folks.

If you will recall, it was one of the "off-brand" organizations that was ready to compromise and support the Manchin-Toomey so-called compromise bill on universal background checks.

NRA, with the strength of numbers, stood firm and turned back all the onerous legislation the democrats just knew they were going to get passed in 2013.

__________________
Georgia On My Mind

Thanks Vito for the gentle nudge.

Boys, after the Newtown , Ct. shooting our (NRAs) Wayne LaPierre was "stomped into less than dirt" for his quoteof"
The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun!"

Remember the "beating" he took for this observation/remedy? The press had a field day, as did antis, Mothers against everythings, and people unencumbered with the concept of protecting themselves.

Now that Sgt. at Arms Vickers has ABSOLUTELY proven Waynes hypothosis to be a truism in a real world scenario, what will be the next step?

Boys, ole Keith 44Spl has as is signature for a long time "I can see it from here." Some people can just "see" further down the road than others.

We must not let this opportunity go unnoticed by the "dogooders", "sheeples" or whatever you call them. Lets keep it going and reference Wayne everytime we discuss this matter.

Thanks Vito for the nudge. Thanks for the subtle observation (my interpretation for quite a spell now). How right ya'll are.

Your thoughts and continuance welcomed.

__________________
Bill
Dis B. Leaf

Then anti's will surely not concede that Wayne LaPierre was right, but will argue that the Sergeant at Arms is an LEO, or failing that argument, that he is a retired LEO with extensive training and thus does not equate to an ordinary citizen carrying a concealed firearm. FOX News reported that this hero had never fired his gun in all of his years as an active LEO, and thus was likely no better in terms of experience or training than many here on this forum, but the committed anti-gun fanatic will likely not be swayed by any of this.

One of my sons is a former LEO who served in a large Midwest city. He took his marksmanship and training seriously, even though he is certainly not what we would call a gun person (he now works in a related but non-sworn field and does not even own a single firearm). He has told me numerous times about how many of his fellow officers were marginal marksman at best, some openly admitted their discomfort with carrying a firearm and/or their dislike of guns, and many who in violation of their department's policy carried their Glock semi's in condition 2 instead of condition 1, and even one female officer who was so afraid of firearms that she carried her service pistol with an empty magazine in it. I bring all this up to just point out the obvious, that a person being a current or former LEO is not inherently or automatically better skilled or prepared for using a concealed firearm than many so-called ordinary citizens. But again, I doubt that this will carry much weight with the committed anti-gun fanatic.

I sent NRA-ILA a donation this AM. It's money well spent & used wisely.

I think most assume a terrorist attack on a gov't building, high density area or military installation. That has pretty much been the MO so far. To me that doesn't make a lot of sense because all of these places have a lot of responders that can quickly neutralize the situation. The most vulnerable area right now is the Mexican/U S border. Per square mile there aren't very many responders. Lots of illegals cross there everyday undetected. DHS isn't telling us how many get through because they don't know.

I think our next terrorist incident will be in some small town near that border. The locals are going to have to take care of themselves for awhile. Not being armed and living there is not a good idea. If I lived there I would have an M4 close by day and night.

To that end we need to be able to own those weapons and we don't need anymore AWB's like the last one. The adm is trying to set us up like a bunch sheep heading for the slaughter house. I feel sorry for the folks in Canada and Australia. I just recently went back to the NRA because of the threat from our own gov't and the radical Islamist. We are going to need those rifles sooner or later. The fox is already in the chicken coop.

__________________
That's just somebody talkin.

Unfortunately, there are lots of gun owners whose idea of the 2A is more in line with the "sensible" views of Chuck Schumer than the NRA.

Personally I don't have a problem with the NRA but to those that do, like them or not, I feel we should all support them financially.
Without them, where would we be?

NRA Lifer here, and maybe the topic is still to raw for me and I need more time to reflect, but in my opinion and the opinion of many of my fellow Washingtonians, the NRA has left us to twist in the breeze on 2 initiatives on the November ballot.

I just posted a brief synopsis of them over in the 2nd Amendment forum, if you'd like to look. The supporters of anti-freedom, anti-gun Initiative 594 have pledged to bring this Draconian blueprint of a law to a state near you.

Here's hoping that, when it comes to you, the NRA does more to help you than it has done to help us.

I can see why the terrorists choose soft targets and the thought of all us gun toting bubbas just may affect target choice. I also think that the terrorists are not the only ones jittery about an armed citizenry.

__________________
Stay safe people!

I do not think that a Jihadist can strut before his peers after being emasculated by a Texas blonde with a 12 guage.

Don't know what efforts the NRA has or has not been active with in Washington. However, both US Senators and your Governor are rated F rated by the NRA.

NRA has to pick battles and funding wisely. Is there anything to suggest that after y'all have have been sending F rated US Senators, Murray and Cantwell, to DC since 1992 and 2001 that there is any hope with pro-gun statewide voting? I don't pay that much attention to Washington, so how much effort and money do you think it would be wise for the NRA to pump into this?

On a side note... we here in Tenn would appreciate it if you'd stop sending that gun-grabbing duo to DC to help take away our gun rights here.

for the whole thread....

Although, to foggood1- The NRA is at it's heart a grass-roots, volunteer organization. While we could all wish for a white knight to swoop in and save the day, it is really the ground game, the state and local level volunteers, who have to take the brunt the grunt work. I recognize and am grateful for your membership, and I know (been seeing the ads) that the antis are lying through their teeth to get their initiative passed. So, you certainly have my sympathy on the issue

All I can say is, if we want the NRA to be better able to serve our needs, we need to join, get involved, and help fund the fight. It's all too easy to sit back and criticize, but we cannot do more without more support and involvement.

To all you guys with the NRA emblem up top, GOOD ON YA'! You have my heartfelt thanks!

__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

I seriously doubt that anyone here voted for either one of those idiots. The NRA members here in WA. aren't creating any problems for you in TN. I don't know why you think everyone in WA supports liberal politicians. Maybe you could elaborate.

__________________
That's just somebody talkin.

I can't answer why NRA does and doesn't do certain things, as I'm just a lowly member.
I do believe that if not for the NRA, rather than enjoying our 2A rights as we do today, we'd be sharpening our personal defense sticks and looking for the best rocks for our gubermint registered slingshots

Really?

I don't think "everyone" in Washington supports your NRA F rated anti-gun US Senators and sends them to DC election after election allowing them to team with other gun-grabbers in DC to collaborate on anti-gun legislation that can affect all of America. However, a majority of Washington voters do (great deal in west Washington) time after time... decade after decade.

So what do you propose we do with the "majority"?

Should we relocate some conservative folks from your state to help us out?

Quite simply, we are out numbered. You should come here and see what it's like to live with them!

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

Geeeeesh... first Foggood blames the NRA for not doing enough, now you want Tennessse to come to the rescue. Yall load your own mags?

Seriously, do you think the NRA could make a decisive difference in regard to this legislation about background check for private sales? My guess is a great number of gun owners in Washington are fine with it or aren't tremendously opposed to it.

OOOOK, again, what do you want us to do?

You make a statement on a GUN FORUM for us in this state to vote against the majority. REALLY?

Have you not paid attention to the funding that "they" have received?

I don't like it either. But to blame us for your troubles is wrong. And we here can't help the fact that we are out numbered and don't have the money that they have.

Petitions against this measure has been in gun shops for MONTHS garnering thousands of signatures. Did it help? NO!

It still made the ballot.

This thread isn't about your state versus mine. It's about the NRA and what they can do for us IF we stand together. Not stand apart and blame each other.

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

No it isn't about Tenn vs Washington. No need for you to keep whining like it is.

This side conversation was started by someone from Washington complaining about the NRA not doing enough regarding the proposed background checks on private sales.

Simple question really. Do you think the NRA can make a decisive difference in the outcome considering your statewide votes are decidedly for F rated anti-gun representatives.

The money I have given the NRA through the years is JUST AS GREEN as the money you or anybody else in this country has given the NRA. They could and should have done a lot more, a LOT more. But they have chosen to stand by, idly.

Lest ye forget: United We Stand; Divided We Fall.

Dude, you didn't see me whining. You made it personal when you shouldn't have.

I WILL vote. Matter of fact I already have.

But I don't like people telling me to do something more when the cards are stacked against me and they know it.

Again, if you have a constructive solution, I'm all for it.

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

Obviously, the majority of voters in WA aren't NRA members. That would mean that the folks who belong to the NRA aren't a driving force in WA politics. They aren't a driving force in CA. or OR. either. Maybe they are in TN. but this isn't TN. Davy Crockett never made it this far west.

How could you possibly have enough information to even make a guess. Are you a political analyst working for the NRA? Do you know how many gun owners there are in WA? Do you know how many of those gun owners are going to vote? Do you know how they are going to vote?

It looks to me like you have some prejudice against people who live in WA. regardless of their politics or their political affiliations. Why don't you just come on out and say it and quit beating around the bush. I can live with it.

__________________
That's just somebody talkin.

If it were not for the NRA you'd already be required to get a background check for private sales via Federal law.

The NRA is pretty savvy about what battles require their attention, battles they think they can win or worthy of investment to have a good chance to make a difference in the outcome. I wouldn't want the NRA blowing $millions on ill fated efforts. I don't know what the NRA is doing in Washington, but if they aren't unloading the entire budget on Washington there might be a goid reason.

It's not very difficult even for a casual observer. The polling done in 2013 showed overwhelming support for background checks on private sales. So much so that it was quite clear that gun owners had to be part of the numbers. My guess is Washington gun owners are not much different.

As far as how Washington voters have voted, that's just a fact. There is no prejudice in fact. No reason to take facts personal.

Taking into consideration the statewide votes in Washington that continue to send F rated US Senators to DC, is it reasonable that the NRA can make a decisive difference in outcome on the private background check vote? Are Washington voters more likeky to be swayed on a single pro-gun issue like this than who they vote for to represent them on a statewide basis? Lets hear why the NRA should be investing many millions into this fight. I'm not saying they shouldn't, but have not seen many compelling reasons to so far. So far all I'm seeing is that you're outnumbered and it's not your fault. Does that sound like a battle cry worthy of investing $10 or $20mil?

Picket line defense. I understand the strategy. Just quit confusing us with the enemy because we happen to be closer to them than you are.

__________________
That's just somebody talkin.

In addition to my "guess", recent polling is suggesting the same. A whopping 54% of gun owners in Washington said they would vote for I-594. Washington?s competing gun measures lose support in polls, study finds | Q13 FOX News

It's not just Washington. As I said earlier, lots of gun owners across America find background checks a compelling argument as polling suggested in 2013. Don't misunderstand, I hope Washington defeats I594. Unfortunately, long-time Washington gun rights activist., Alan Gottlieb, believes I594 will pass.

If there is any confusion about who the the enemy of gun freedoms are... they are those who would vote for such things.

Tennessee is not isolated from enemies of gun freedoms. They are in abundance here. I don't blame the NRA for it or characterize others who recognize these realities as "prejudice". Just having some discussion on the issue. I think I've had enough now.

No kidding.

Stop for a second and reflect about who you are having this discussion with. We aren't the average gun owning public that you site in your Fox news article or the average voter that keeps sending AG senators to DC. Personally, I didn't expect the NRA to spend a dime here but obviously some members did. I think they may have a right to expect that and don't really like being talked down to about WA's liberal politics as if we control that.

The AG crowd is spending their money locally now and it's working. Their tactics have changed. All of us here know full well how our agenda will be defeated. It doesn't have so much to do with the apathetic gun owners as it does with the millions of dollars that were spent to get I-594 passed. We were pretty much dead even when this thing started but the money changed all of that.

No more to say.

__________________
That's just somebody talkin.

Living in Western Washington is difficult for non liberals. During the I594 debate (not really much of a debate) All the network and most of the cable channels were saturated with Bloomberg funded commercials while the only pro gun spots were on the Sportsman channel which isn't a very far reaching venue. I think my son (35) said it best. He says "why even vote, the outcome is already decided!" Unfortunately I think he's correct. I still vote, just because I can, but being conservative in this part of WA is like spitting into the wind. Not a pleasant experience. The most we could do was put yard signs, bumper stickers, and talk to as many people as possible. Not much of a defense against millions of dollars from Bloomberg, Gates, Allen, (and a few of their cronies). I think all we can do is keep trying, futile as it may seem at times.

__________________
Minimize the variables

What it all boils down to is this.....If it were not for the N.R.A. There would be ZERO Citizen owned firearms in America, today. They would all have been taken from us YEARS ago. I think everyone who owns a gun should be GLAD to be a member of the N.R.A. More than 100 MILLION gun owners in America, yet only 5million are N.R.A. members. W.T.F.? If there were over 100 million N.R.A. members, the issue of gun control would simply not exhist in this country. Talk is cheap. Join now.

__________________
Not in Kansas anymore, Toto.

I support the NRA. I may not like every thing they say or do. That is true of any organization a person belongs to. The most of it is very good.
I live in Chicago. If not for the NRA I would not be able to own a gun. Because of the NRA Chicago gun laws were thrown out . Then gun registration was thrown out. Then the state law banning CCW was thrown out.
They have to pick and choose their battles. Spend the money wisely. If not Bloomberg and his crowd will run the over.