Companies dumping the NRA

[PrairieSpyder]

I noticed that Dick's Sporting Goods has stopped selling 'assault-type' weapons and large capacity magazines. And, I believe they have voluntarily raised the age limit for purchasing weapons to 21. Seems like a reasonable approach to the school shooter issue by a large company.

They're jumping on the anti-AR15 bandwagon. They stopped selling them several years ago, except in a very few of their stores that have a different name. I think this news is about a change of policy in only those few stores.

I don't get why people are so defensive about the NRA. Nobody in this thread attacked the NRA. Someone simply pointed out that some companies cut their ties with the NRA. Cutting ties is not a condemnation of the NRA, that's either (a) a business decision that the companies think the association reflects badly on them, or (b) the companies exercising their First Amendment rights. It may be a stupid business decision, it may be a stupid "statement" to make, but it's THEIR constitutional right.

As for arming teachers, it seems to me that the answer to gun violence in schools is not to bring more guns to school, especially in the classroom. I could foresee a teacher forgetting to safeguard the gun and a student stealing it and starting shooting. Or a teacher boils over and goes postal on his students. I could more easily agree with the principal and some of the administration being armed although even then there is still a risk that someone goes postal. I'd agree with installing metal detectors before I'd agree with bringing more guns to school.

Of course it's about the NRA. That's what it's about for those businesses.

 

[PrairieSpyder]

Well the first instance of an armed teacher going nuts just occurred today. Didn't take long,did it. Seems like several of you predicted this in earlier posts.
Meanwhile an interesting article regarding the reduction of gun related injuries during the nra conventions. Nationally there has been a drop of 20%. :shocked: This was published in the New England Journal of Medicine,(renown for fake news) and authored by professors from Harvard and Columbia U.

Too bad there wasn't another armed teacher in the vicinity to help end the situation sooner!

 

[Trickie Dick]

Looks like Walmart jumped on the bandwagon too. The bandwagon just keeps getting bigger and bigger. Won't help though until its decided to stop it altogether. No more military style weapons for civilians. No more high capacity magazines. No more bump stocks or the like. Get the NRA back to it's original purpose instead of being the shill for the gun manufacturers.

 

[Orange Spyder Man]

IF YOU FAVOR OUR GOVERNMENT DISARMING ITS CITIZENS... READ THIS : THIS IS FACT.. NOT FICTION ... THINK IT COULD NOT HAPPEN HERE... SO DID THESE CITIZENS OF OTHER COUNTRIES ..

Here’s a history of what happens after governments have disarmed their citizens:1911 – Turkey disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1915 – 1917 they murdered 1.5 million Armenians.1929 – Russia disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1929 – 1953 they murdered 20 million Russians.1935 – China disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1948 – 1952 they murdered 20 million Chinese.1938 – Germany disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1939 – 1945 they murdered 16 million Jews.1956 – Cambodia disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1975 – 1977 they murdered 1 million Educated people.1964 – Guatamala disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1964 – 1981 they murdered 100,000 Mayan Indians.1970 – Uganda disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1971 – 1979 they murdered 300,000 Christians.[Editor: You can argue about the numbers, but the point here is that disarmed citizens are vulnerable, and that there are many historical examples of disarmed citizens being killed and oppressed by their own government. The excuse given by authorities that they need to take guns away from citizens in order to lower crime rates is not supported by facts. Even if a government does not turn on its own citizens after disarming them, people are less safe – because unarmed citizens are easy targets to criminals. Over and over again, it has been clearly shown that taking guns away from citizens does not lead to a decrease in crime but rather a dramatic increase.]Australia has disarmed it’s citizens, and a year later the homicide rate in the largest province is up 300%. The burglaries of seniors is “dramatically” up.I guess the criminals did not turn their weapons in. Only the innocent law abiding citizens turned in weapons.In US cities with the highest crime rates, taking guns away from the citizens has not lowered the homicide rate. All it has done is to make it easier for criminals to operate.The 2nd amendment is not about duck hunting, or deer hunting. It is about having the ability and the right to defend oneself and your family. It doesn’t matter if that threat is a burglar, or the Federal Government. A disarmed population is fair game for any president who may be aspiring to become a dictator. Having its citizens armed was the plain and simple intent of the founding fathers of our country.​

 

[Bob Denman]

If we don't learn from our past: we are doomed to repeat it...

 

[Easy Rider]

gun free zones just say come on in and do what you want just the threat that there could be a gun waiting on the out side will be a big deterrent

Maybe it should be.......but it isn't.

It is all about who "gets the drop" first.

No matter what kind or how many guns you have........if the bad guy(s) has his pointed at your head from 12 inches away FIRST......you are pretty much screwed. Reaching for any kind of weapon in that situation is NOT a smart thing to do.

There is no such thing as a "gun free zone" without effective screening at the doors.

 

[Easy Rider]

If we don't learn from our past: we are doomed to repeat it...

Right. We tried "open carry" for a fairly long time back in the 1800s.........and it didn't work very good.
It won't work very good now either.

And those who point to "gun confiscation" in other countries in the past are just throwing up an inflammatory smoke screen.

 

[Bob Denman]

Maybe it should be.......but it isn't.

It is all about who "gets the drop" first.

No matter what kind or how many guns you have........if the bad guy(s) has his pointed at your head from 12 inches away FIRST......you are pretty much screwed. Reaching for any kind of weapon in that situation is NOT a smart thing to do.

There is no such thing as a "gun free zone" without effective screening at the doors.

Tactics, Man... you're completely ignoring the fact that it's tactics, that make the difference.
Situational awareness keeps them from getting that close to you... ever!

"screening at the doors"??? You're joking: aren't you?
You need to harden the entrances!
NOBODY gets in; without being let in! nojoke

 

[Big F]

http://fox43.com/2018/02/26/delta-and-united-join-list-of-companies-to-cut-ties-with-the-nra/

Everyone has got this thing wrong! Guns don't kill people, people do...
these idiots that do these bad deeds are going to get a gun in their hands no matter what anyone does!!
The companies that are dropping their association with NRA have it all wrong also. Our own bureaucratic system failed on the Florida shooter!
Put the blame where it belongs, we have way too much Government in our lives..
BIG F

 

[RinconRyder]

No... It's smart gunfighting tactics!
1. Protect your classroom... lock the door, and remain hidden off to one side of it...
2. You'd have to get a feel for the situation; in order to know if you could react to gunshots in an adjoining room. If the mutt went in, and was taking the time to shoot everyone :shocked:: that WOULD in theory: give you time enough to unlock your door (QUIETLY!!!!!), and shoot the mutt as he leaves the room...


..But that's a call made at the moment, by the person in the room. Without the training necessary: they would be exposing themselves and their students to Death Sentences... nojoke

There is NO such thing as a fair gunfight, and second place finishes get you buried.
If you can ambush the Mutt without endangering the Students: it would be what I'd do!

If any teacher was already concerned enough to get a firearm and the necessary training I would assume they would have already done so. If they haven't, well, that tells another story.

 

[RinconRyder]

Everyone has got this thing wrong! Guns don't kill people, people do...
these idiots that do these bad deeds are going to get a gun in their hands no matter what anyone does!!
The companies that are dropping their association with NRA have it all wrong also. Our own bureaucratic system failed on the Florida shooter!
Put the blame where it belongs, we have way too much Government in our lives..
BIG F

CORRECTION: People with guns kill people!

And yes, if you are truly a bad guy you can find a gun somewhere BUT you should know that not one of the school shooters nor the LV shooter had police records. Not one of them. So, they weren't the "bad guy" until they pulled the trigger and mowed down a lot of innocent people.

The companies dropping their NRA bennies are retreating from a brand fiasco. They don't want to be on the wrong (read: losing) side of this issue. See my earlier post for a more complete description of why they are doing this. It has to do with business and not politics or gun control per se.

And yes, your Flori-duh authorities at multiple levels completely dropped the ball on this and should be held accountable. That would be in my list of things to look at but only after we remove as many of the weapons as possible.

 

[Pirate looks at --]

I noticed that Dick's Sporting Goods has stopped selling 'assault-type' weapons and large capacity magazines. And, I believe they have voluntarily raised the age limit for purchasing weapons to 21. Seems like a reasonable approach to the school shooter issue by a large company.

I just became a big Dick's Sporting Goods fan!:clap::clap::thumbup::firstplace:

 

[Pirate looks at --]

Wow. I've never heard that argument before. So coherent, too.

Pete your sarcasm is showing!:yikes:

 

[Pirate looks at --]

I think he was being facetious with the parenthetical remark.

Agreed, that was sarcasm being displayed!

 

[Bob Denman]

If any teacher was already concerned enough to get a firearm and the necessary training I would assume they would have already done so. If they haven't, well, that tells another story.

In many Districts: Schools are currently Gun-Free Zones...

 

[Bob Denman]

Pete your sarcasm is showing!:yikes:

 

[Machinegunner]

What concerns me, was yesterday there was discussion of confiscating guns first and then going to court. Anybody with a disagreement with you could report you to authorities and you would lose you gun rights. Would cost an innocent person thousands of dollars to maybe get their rights back. Very scary slippery slope. The Constitution guaranties due process. We have to follow our Constitution or we are done.

 

[r1100rider]

Maybe it should be.......but it isn't.

It is all about who "gets the drop" first.

No matter what kind or how many guns you have........if the bad guy(s) has his pointed at your head from 12 inches away FIRST......you are pretty much screwed. Reaching for any kind of weapon in that situation is NOT a smart thing to do.

There is no such thing as a "gun free zone" without effective screening at the doors.

Please list all the mass shootings that were not in gun free zones

 

[UtahPete]

What concerns me, was yesterday there was discussion of confiscating guns first and then going to court. Anybody with a disagreement with you could report you to authorities and you would lose you gun rights. Would cost an innocent person thousands of dollars to maybe get their rights back. Very scary slippery slope. The Constitution guaranties due process. We have to follow our Constitution or we are done.

I believe it was our President who suggested that would be his preference .

 

[Bob Denman]

While I'm not 100% behind this one: I can appreciate the motives behind it.
Get the firearms out of the way; adjudicate the situation, and give them back if no problems are found.

Is it worse to leave the firearms in the home, and let the owner know that there's a potential problem??? :shocked:

A lot of the finer details of this Plan need to be shown to me...