From my cold, dead. hands! Except in Detroit and Chicago - Page 509 - Politics and Economics

Full of ****

corporate special interest group

of lying

racists

*******s

like

Ted Nugent

Who is on the NRA board of directors

An expert "dog whistler"

An outspoken racism denier

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3646681.html

Big proud fan of the N-word

http://www.vpc.org/studies/nrafamst.htm

I haven't even gotten to the hint that was dropped earlier. Let's have a quiz:

Who refered to the civil war as "The war of northern aggression" in the past year?

A. The President of the NRA
B. The President of the NRA
C. All of the above

This quiz is literally unfailable!!!

Sleep with country dogs and you might get fleas.

Racism thread is that way...

09-15-2013 , 09:01 PM

#12702

rjoefish

Got Out the Vote

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 31,086

ROFL you asked him to respond

09-15-2013 , 09:12 PM

#12703

13ball

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 12,912

Morons take assault rifles to farmer's market.

I would call 911 on idiots like these 100% of the time. If you are disturbed enough to carry your assault rifle into a group of hundreds of people then it's not unreasonable to assume that the chance of you opening fire on those people is significantly higher than average.

09-15-2013 , 09:32 PM

#12704

spanktehbadwookie

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 19,374

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilkain

Racism thread is that way...

*bows*

09-15-2013 , 11:20 PM

#12705

Pilkain

old hand

Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,779

Quote:

Originally Posted by spanktehbadwookie

*bows*

So you believe the entire NRA are as fanatical as those two people?

09-15-2013 , 11:26 PM

#12706

master3004

Revisionist Historian

Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 56,419

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilkain

So you believe the entire NRA are as fanatical as those two people?

I think the point is that one is the head of the organization, and the other is one of their most recognozable celebrity spokesmen. Those who choose to involve themselves in such an organization are more likely to share their opinions

09-16-2013 , 10:50 AM

#12707

Riverman

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 73,135

Great, another mass shooting.

09-16-2013 , 01:30 PM

#12708

Namath12

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 55,849

90%+ of Americans favor expanding background checks for gun purchases, and it can't even get out of committee in Congress. Ninety. ****ing. Percent.

If a functional Death Star ever becomes operational it will be because of NRA funding.

09-16-2013 , 02:05 PM

#12709

Sommerset

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 3,863

At this point, beating the drum of "my personal freedoms!" seems like the most utterly selfish thing anyone could possibly espouse.

Spoiler:

09-16-2013 , 02:08 PM

#12710

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashington

You're pretty foolish if you think polling is good here. How questions are asked are important, and once you start saying what the proposal actually is (ie, the government requires individual citizens to gather the private info of any prospective buyer) and support plummets.

09-16-2013 , 02:56 PM

#12711

13ball

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 12,912

To what? 80%?

09-16-2013 , 02:58 PM

#12712

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Quote:

Originally Posted by 13ball

To what? 80%?

Based on the wording the polling can change massively.

09-16-2013 , 03:19 PM

#12713

13ball

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 12,912

Obviously, but saying that "the government requires individual citizens to gather the private info of any prospective buyer" is going to sway responses in the other direction. What's a reasonable way to word the question?

"Would you support or oppose a law requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows or online?"

gets 83% support. But that's Quinnipiac and I don't recall how good they are. Seems like a neutral way to word it, though.

09-16-2013 , 03:27 PM

#12714

drugsarebad

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 3,692

The lowest I see support "plummeting" here is to 70%, and that's with more specific wording, and after the whole issue was politicized by the Congressional vote.

Quote:

If the buyer is trying to purchase a gun from another person who is not a gun dealer but owns one or more guns and wants to sell one of them

It breaks 70/29 in favor.

http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

09-16-2013 , 04:22 PM

#12715

Sommerset

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 3,863

Massive change we can believe in LDO

09-16-2013 , 05:02 PM

#12716

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Quote:

Originally Posted by 13ball

The simple fact is the NRA isn't some super powerful entity that is keeping wildly popular bills from passing. The support for what is delightfully termed for universal background checks simply isn't that high when put into what the program actually is. The support is also pretty shallow.

I think the best way to come at this question are more strict/less strict/just right polls, because poll questions like: "As you may know, the Senate recently rejected a proposal to require background checks on people buying guns at gun shows and online."

Are laughably bad.

09-16-2013 , 05:03 PM

#12717

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Quote:

Originally Posted by drugsarebad

The lowest I see support "plummeting" here is to 70%, and that's with more specific wording, and after the whole issue was politicized by the Congressional vote.

It breaks 70/29 in favor.

http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

lol from your link, first poll, more strict, 51%.

09-16-2013 , 05:03 PM

#12718

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Unless people think the NRA shoots magical unicorns you have to believe that support for background checks is either incorrectly polled or amazingly shallow.

09-16-2013 , 05:10 PM

#12719

Sommerset

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 3,863

Quote:

Originally Posted by ikestoys

I think the best way to come at this question are more strict/less strict/just right polls (SNIP)

Strenuously disagree with this. Reason being is that the question is so incredibly vague and most people who wouldn't otherwise know the specifics of what "stricter gun laws" entail are just going to vote their position. In contrast, a question like the one DAB posted gives those that are being pollled on what "stricter gun laws" would actually protect.

I don't think it's a huge stretch to assume most people are under informed on issues (regardless of what side they are on) and so giving them specific information is a good thing

09-16-2013 , 05:11 PM

#12720

Imaginary F(r)iend

veteran

Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 3,197

NRA wouldn't incorrectly poll, would they?

09-16-2013 , 05:14 PM

#12721

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sommerset

Strenuously disagree with this. Reason being is that the question is so incredibly vague and most people who wouldn't otherwise know the specifics of what "stricter gun laws" entail are just going to vote their position. In contrast, a question like the one DAB posted gives those that are being pollled on what "stricter gun laws" would actually protect.

I don't think it's a huge stretch to assume most people are under informed on issues (regardless of what side they are on) and so giving them specific information is a good thing

Ummm duh, hence why using the term 'universal background checks' is super bad. If the support in general for gun laws was so massively positive, you'd expect there to be broad support for the expansion of gun laws. There simply isn't

09-16-2013 , 05:21 PM

#12722

Sommerset

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 3,863

Quote:

Originally Posted by ikestoys

Not necessarily I wouldn't, because when you mention "stricter gun laws" it is a hot button and people hear "take my guns away." People need to know exactly what that means, and when they do, it turns out they support it

09-16-2013 , 05:24 PM

#12723

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sommerset

Not necessarily I wouldn't, because when you mention "stricter gun laws" it is a hot button and people hear "take my guns away." People need to know exactly what that means, and when they do, it turns out they support it

Nice **** you're making up there, and it looks a lot like intentional dishonesty given your earlier post.