- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 281,619
- Reaction score
- 100,389
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
The statists hate the NRA. armed taxpayers are a frightening concept to the looters and parasites.
Actually as already noted in thread, the NRA knew what they were doing when they booked the event and their law abiding members had no problem with obeying the stipulations. All of them are already familiar with adherence to the law and only in internetz land does their choice to hold their convention at a public facility that does not allow guns on premises, rate on the scandal meter. In fact, I suspect that the desire to be able to have open bars and adult beverages on hand for a "convention" had more to do with the matter than anything else. :roll:
BTW- This is hardly the first time a NRA convention was held at a convention facility where firearms were prohibited; most of those types of facilities in the United States have the same limitations. Must have been a really slow news day.............
I'm a GOA member. I let my NRA membership lapse after they opposed a bill in my state that would have expanded on CCW rights... they opposed it because it didn't originate with the NRA, but with the GOA. That's inexcusable.
I'm a GOA member. I let my NRA membership lapse after they opposed a bill in my state that would have expanded on CCW rights... they opposed it because it didn't originate with the NRA, but with the GOA. That's inexcusable.
Can you cite this law and the NRA's opposition?I'm a GOA member. I let my NRA membership lapse after they opposed a bill in my state that would have expanded on CCW rights... they opposed it because it didn't originate with the NRA, but with the GOA. That's inexcusable.
On this whole, this is a below-average example of your usual sophistry.If the place where their meeting is being held has banned guns from the premise. And the NRA - a strong pro-gun group - has specifically chosen that location to hold their meeting at. Isn't the NRA agreeing to ban guns from their meeting? I mean why hold it there if they want people who carry guns to go there?
That just wouldn't work out. If that applied that interpretation to the 1st Amendment, then private Catholic schools would be required to allow Muslims, bosses wouldn't be allowed to fire employees for dissing them while on the clock, etc etc. Besides it would be an increase in federal govt regulation of the private sector, if that's worth anything.I can't agree with the notion that we should leave rights at the door if that's what a private business owner wishes.
"All women who enter are subject to rape."
"Children may be confiscated and sold at the building owner's discretion"
No one should have the authority to keep you from your weapon while on their private property any more then they can keep you from drawing breath.
I'm a GOA member. I let my NRA membership lapse after they opposed a bill in my state that would have expanded on CCW rights... they opposed it because it didn't originate with the NRA, but with the GOA. That's inexcusable.
I personally refuse to be a member of any of these groups, in the regard members become targets of authoritarians.
what was that line from one of the patriots
we must all hang together or surely we will hang individually?
Can you cite this law and the NRA's opposition?
Just curious -- I haven't heard of any such thing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?