The National Rifle Association represents everything that is wrong with the federal government today (“The NRA’s true colors,” Editorial, Jan. 17). NRA president David Keene can issue orders to his “army of robot congressmen,” as your editorial put it, because the gun lobby has bought and paid for them. So, instead of doing what’s right, they will do everything they can to block any changes to today’s gun laws.
One can support the Second Amendment while recognizing that there is no need for average citizens to own assault weapons.
Comments
The illegals sway over the liberals is a national ill. One can support compassion while recognizing that there is no reason for average citizens to have to support the hordes of illegals swarming over the border.
This comment has been removed.
Any Lobbying group that has this much power is an ill, sadly the list of them is long and is not just limited to the NRA
THAT I can agree with! Out with ALL lobbying groups. Stop all campaign contributions by businesses. No campaign contributions by individuals over $10. Our government has literally been bought and paid for.
Yadda, yadda. And there is no Brady Bunch that ever talks to Senators and Representatives. Or any other anti gun group for that matter.
Gee, if those anti gun groups are outnumbered by one itty bitty gun group (I hear the NRA only has 4 million members), that should tell all you anti-gun folks out there something shouldn't it? Like maybe there is not this "huge anti-gun ground swell" that you think there is in the country. Maybe the Kool-Aid MSM has been handing you has something in it?
Now, you could all join the Brady Bunch, give them LOTS of money, or if there are as many of you as you think there is, give them a little bit of money, and you could have your own "oh so powerful" lobby. I am sure there are some very powerful folks (Soros comes to mind) with money oozing out of their pores who can match the contributions that you all claim comes from gun manufacturers.
Get over it, it is the way our system works, quit trying to "game the system". Quit crying, whining and sniveling. Jeeze.
No, one cannot support the 2A and say there is no need for assault weapons. First off, we do not have a "Bill of Needs", secondly, they are not "assault weapons". Third, you need to go read the DC v Heller decision, page 8, it will fill you in why you are wrong.