Question About NRA and Wayne LaPierre

This is a discussion on Question About NRA and Wayne LaPierre within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Rugerguy I don't need to do anything. There are probably some here that have been following LaPierre for years longer than me. ...

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 90
Like Tree73Likes

Thread: Question About NRA and Wayne LaPierre

  1. #31
    VIP Member Array Harryball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lansing Mi
    Posts
    6,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Rugerguy View Post
    I don't need to do anything. There are probably some here that have been following LaPierre for years longer than me. I'm not going to write a college thesis on him. So I ask again, is there anyone else here that knows specifically what he spins?? I would be glad to look up after I know what he is suspected of spinning?
    Look up the small arms treaty. That should get you started.
    suntzu likes this.
    Don"t let stupid be your skill set....

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,796
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryball View Post
    Look up the small arms treaty. That should get you started.
    Wait a minute! I donated an extra 5000 bucks to make sure Mr. LaPierre fought that. Wouldn't want the UN coming here to take our guns away LOL. That was my favorite one. Perfect example,,thanks Harryball.

  4. #33
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    15,727
    I just wish he'd stop mailing me a membership renewal every month.
    suntzu likes this.
    Retired USAF E-8. Remember: You're being watched!
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  5. #34
    Distinguished Member
    Array phreddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Spartanburg, SC
    Posts
    1,966
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Wait a minute! I donated an extra 5000 bucks to make sure Mr. LaPierre fought that. Wouldn't want the UN coming here to take our guns away LOL. That was my favorite one. Perfect example,,thanks Harryball.
    Looks like you just did the same type of thing you are complaining about. You used hyperbole and an untrue statement to make a point. Is it OK for you to do it but not for Mr. Lapierre?


    He may over the top sometimes, but I agree with the NRA more often than not and they are pushing in the same direction I am.

  6. #35
    VIP Member Array Harryball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lansing Mi
    Posts
    6,935
    Quote Originally Posted by phreddy View Post
    Looks like you just did the same type of thing you are complaining about. You used hyperbole and an untrue statement to make a point. Is it OK for you to do it but not for Mr. Lapierre?


    He may over the top sometimes, but I agree with the NRA more often than not and they are pushing in the same direction I am.
    Phreddy, you know he is kidding right? As for the NRAs take on the UN small arms treaty, it was insinuated that the UN would come in and take our guns.
    Toorop likes this.
    Don"t let stupid be your skill set....

  7. #36
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,796
    Quote Originally Posted by phreddy View Post
    Looks like you just did the same type of thing you are complaining about. You used hyperbole and an untrue statement to make a point. Is it OK for you to do it but not for Mr. Lapierre?


    He may over the top sometimes, but I agree with the NRA more often than not and they are pushing in the same direction I am.
    Sorry if you don't understand sarcasm. Did you not notice the 'LOL' after the statement I made. Most folks would undeerstand I did not donate 5000 dollars LOL. And as far as Mr LaPierre is concerned even adressing the treaty is a waste of time. It has been established by SCOTUS that NO treaty trumps the Constituiton.

    NRA on the UN’s Small Arms Trade Treaty | The Truth About Guns

    That is but one letter. I can post more inflammatory and in correct ones if you want including you tubes of his speeches.

  8. #37
    Distinguished Member Array BigStick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Gig Harbor, WA
    Posts
    1,455
    While the constitution SHOULD prtect us, that doesn't mean that we should let Hillary and Barack swear to the rest of the world that they buy into the treaty, and then have more issues importing quality guns from other countries that would then be bound to not trade in illicit arms to foreign countries. It would be sad not to be able to by Sigs, Glocks, XDs, HK, etc... because they were banned from selling them to us by a treaty. Would we still have guns? Yes, but if the NGOs lobying the UN get their way, they would only be purely domestic made guns.

    And while the 2nd ammendment would protect us (for now, depending on the next SCOTUS appointees), why should we let it get to the point where a treaty needs to be challenged? Yes he dramatizes the issues, but that is how you get support from people who might otherwise be sitting on their hands. Getting people interested and involved is important, and LaPierre is good at that.
    Stubborn likes this.
    Walk softly ...

  9. #38
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,796
    Quote Originally Posted by BigStick View Post
    While the constitution SHOULD prtect us, that doesn't mean that we should let Hillary and Barack swear to the rest of the world that they buy into the treaty, and then have more issues importing quality guns from other countries that would then be bound to not trade in illicit arms to foreign countries. It would be sad not to be able to by Sigs, Glocks, XDs, HK, etc... because they were banned from selling them to us by a treaty. Would we still have guns? Yes, but if the NGOs lobying the UN get their way, they would only be purely domestic made guns.

    And while the 2nd ammendment would protect us (for now, depending on the next SCOTUS appointees), why should we let it get to the point where a treaty needs to be challenged? Yes he dramatizes the issues, but that is how you get support from people who might otherwise be sitting on their hands. Getting people interested and involved is important, and LaPierre is good at that.
    Out of curiosity, have you read the treaty and have done any research except for the rhetoric of the NRA and GOA? And, if both orgs presented just facts to you would you or would you not contribute? That is the main point I am making. If your cause is just you don't need rhetoric and fear mongering.I would still donate because of the overall good they do. But sorry, I don't drink the Kool aid nor do I bow to the alter of the almighty NRA and GOA. I like to be presented with facts so I can figure it out myself.

  10. #39
    Distinguished Member Array Stubborn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tampa Fl
    Posts
    1,530
    I wish I could be as positive about this treaty as you are "Suntzu".
    I DO KNOW we have a Sec'y of State, and POTUS that have pledged their "full Support".
    I'm also afraid we have a Senate majority that would ratify the treaty.
    I agree with you that the Constitution SHOULD stop it, but then the Constitution Should have stopped the "Healthcare Bill" we had shoved down our throats.

    Our beloved POTUS has already banned American made M-1 rifles from being re-imported into the U.S....done by "Executive Order".
    This man has zero regard for the Constitution. To him it's just something that gets in his way and slows down his socialist agenda.

    Out of curiosity, have you read the treaty and have done any research except for the rhetoric of the NRA and GOA? And, if both orgs presented just facts to you would you or would you not contribute? That is the main point I am making. If your cause is just you don't need rhetoric and fear mongering.I would still donate because of the overall good they do. But sorry, I don't drink the Kool aid nor do I bow to the alter of the almighty NRA and GOA. I like to be presented with facts so I can figure it out myself.
    Once again, there is nothing to read...yet. It is still in the drafting stages. But don't worry, Hillary Clinton is watching out for Americans gun rights.
    She is working "hand in hand" to assure an "effective treaty".
    "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it".
    Thomas Jefferson

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  11. #40
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,796
    Quote Originally Posted by Stubborn View Post
    I wish I could be as positive about this treaty as you are "Suntzu".
    I DO KNOW we have a Sec'y of State, and POTUS that have pledged their "full Support".
    I'm also afraid we have a Senate majority that would ratify the treaty.
    I agree with you that the Constitution SHOULD stop it, but then the Constitution Should have stopped the "Healthcare Bill" we had shoved down our throats.

    Our beloved POTUS has already banned American made M-1 rifles from being re-imported into the U.S....done by "Executive Order".
    This man has zero regard for the Constitution. To him it's just something that gets in his way and slows down his socialist agenda.
    Well, this is why I did not want to bring up a specific issue and told the OP to do his own research. We can all disagree on certain issues or in this case how it resolves it self. But pertaining to your post, there are two differences. One is the treaty part has already been ruled on by SCOTUS. The healthcare bill is going through our democatic process right now and is before the SCOTUS.

    But back to the original topic. Even folks that like Mr LaPierre admit he is or can be considerd fear mongering. And like I have said numerous of times...I support the NRA, but I do not like being treated like an imbecile by having someone tell me the sky is falling every two seconds or this is the most important election in our lifetime....they are all imp[ortant

  12. #41
    Distinguished Member Array Stubborn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tampa Fl
    Posts
    1,530
    I guess I'm of the opinion, if a little "fear mongering" will produce the results needed to assure our continued 2A freedoms, well then so be it.

    I was a child of the 50's and 60's and can honestly say this IS the most important Presidential election of my lifetime. There is far too much at stake this time around to be taken lightly.
    Rugerguy likes this.
    "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it".
    Thomas Jefferson

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  13. #42
    VIP Member
    Array atctimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NSA Headquarters
    Posts
    6,357
    I do not like being treated like an imbecile
    I think this quote sums up my feeling to a tee.
    Mark Twain:
    The government is merely a servant -- merely a temporary servant; it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a
    patriot and who isn't. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them.

  14. #43
    Member Array Rugerguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    101
    I guess I'm in the naive camp then. I thought there was a real threat to 2A. One thing you cannot deny, Wayne La Pierre gives one hell of a good speech and seems to be an effective lobbyist. I'll naively renew. Ted Nugent sure looks like he is unraveling.

  15. #44
    Distinguished Member Array Toorop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Midwest Area to be Precise.
    Posts
    1,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Stubborn View Post
    I guess I'm of the opinion, if a little "fear mongering" will produce the results needed to assure our continued 2A freedoms, well then so be it.

    I was a child of the 50's and 60's and can honestly say this IS the most important Presidential election of my lifetime. There is far too much at stake this time around to be taken lightly.
    What is at stake? I would argue that some of the elections in the 60s were more important. Civil rights being the big one I am thinking of.
    Hopyard likes this.

  16. #45
    Distinguished Member Array BigStick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Gig Harbor, WA
    Posts
    1,455
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Out of curiosity, have you read the treaty and have done any research except for the rhetoric of the NRA and GOA? And, if both orgs presented just facts to you would you or would you not contribute? That is the main point I am making. If your cause is just you don't need rhetoric and fear mongering.I would still donate because of the overall good they do. But sorry, I don't drink the Kool aid nor do I bow to the alter of the almighty NRA and GOA. I like to be presented with facts so I can figure it out myself.
    I have not read the entire proposed treaty, but what I have read would prevent international sales of small arms to other than government bodies. At least from how I interpreted it. That would dramatically change the scope of the firearms market in the US. And while I am primarily concerned with my(our) rights, I don't like the idea of signing on to something that will violate the innaleanable rights of citizens of less enlightened, more oppressive countries.

    And as stated by someone else, it is still just a proposed treaty. But there are plenty of Non-Governmental Organizations(NGOs) as well as member States that would like nothing more than to destroy all guns in the hands of civilians across the globe. If we didn't voice our opposition and allowed them to have their way, the proposed treaty would do just that. I would rather squash the idea before it even gets on paper.

    And to answer your other question, yes. I would still give them the money even if they just presented the facts. But there are many who would not. And some of those flambouyant headlines will make people pick up a magazine and read, hopefully prompting them to do more research and educate themselves. Manipulation is not desired, but it can be very effective.

    We should give some thought to the disparity of force being applied to our rights.
    Walk softly ...

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

an armed society is a polite society lapierre
,
how much wayne pierre of the nra make ayear
,
i own guns but don't support the nra
,

is the nra worth joining

,

lapierre gun control 1990 statement

,
nra
,
nra previous statement 1990's
,

state concealed carry laws and supremacy clause

,

treaty 100-13

,
wayne lapierre gun control conspiracy
,

wayne lapierre survivalist

,
what did wayne lapierre say in the 1990's
Click on a term to search for related topics.