Guess who keeps a gun-owner registry? The NRA

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator

Guess who keeps a gun-owner registry?​

The NRA




159776368.jpg



National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre made it very clear this spring that the organization categorically opposed any gun-owner registry.

“What’s the point of registering lawful gun owners anyway?” LaPierre asked in a speech before the Conservative Political Action Committee in March. “So newspapers can print those names and addresses for criminals and gangs to access? So that list can be hacked by foreign entities like the Chinese, who recently hacked Pentagon computers? So that list can be handed over to the Mexican government that, oh, by the way has already requested it.”

The NRA complained loudly about “anti-gun media outlets” who they said had abused the privilege of the Freedom of Information Act by publishing the names of registered gun-owners. But, as it turns out, the NRA itself has requested the lists of registered gun owners from different states, using the lists to raise funds and recruit new members, BuzzFeed reported Tuesday.

Earlier this year the NRA opposed a bipartisan bill in Congress that would have required background checks on commercial firearms purchases. The gun lobby opposed the legislation, sponsored by Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Republican Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, claiming it would have created a federal database of gun owners, even though the same legislation mandated a 15-year prison sentence for any official who knowingly tried to create a federal registry.

According to the website, in July 2009, a North Carolina-based firm called Preferred Communications sent an email “on behalf of the National Rifle Association” to the Virginia state police asking whether the names of concealed-carry permit holders could be purchased.

Christopher Ranger, a gun lobbyist, wrote from an official NRA email address to the Iowa Department of Public Safety asking how the organization could “collect data” on gun permit holders in another email obtained by BuzzFeed. Unnamed officials in Arkansas and Oregon also said they had similarly received requests for gun owner lists, the site reported.

In Tennessee, an NRA-certified firearms “training academy” requested information from a database of gun owners maintained by the state’s Department of Safety and Homeland Security, Gawker reported in February.

Lawmakers in Tennessee have periodically introduced bills that would seal the personal information of gun permit holders in an effort to protect their privacy, a position which NRA officials’ public claims would seem to support. One bill failed in 2009 “when questions about closing the records” to advocacy groups that would use gun registry lists for “fundraising purposes” put the brakes on it, according to WSMV, an NBC affiliate television station in Nashville. A bill introduced earlier this year has also failed to pass the Tennessee legislature.

The NRA has yet to comment on its efforts to obtain the names and address of registered gun owners.



SOURCE



 

Its not the Federal Government that's compiling the list of gun owners

its the NRA itself !!!

The NRA's Secret Database of Gun Owners





<param name="movie" value="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" /><param name="FlashVars" value="launch=52815157&amp;width=420&amp;height=245" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed name="msnbc3a5e07" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" width="420" height="245" FlashVars="launch=52815157&amp;width=420&amp;height=245" allowscriptaccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed></object><p style="font-size:11px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #999; margin-top: 5px; background: transparent; text-align: center; width: 420px;">Visit NBCNews.com for <a style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;" href="http://www.nbcnews.com">breaking news</a>, <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032507" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">world news</a>, and <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032072" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">news about the economy</a></p>


 
Is this the nature of this board's fascination with the NRA? You thought they were a competing government or somehow equivalent?

The NRA has a database so it should be fine if the Federal government has one as well?
 
"but the nra ain't the gubment' so it's okay....."

-white America

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 4
 
Is this the nature of this board's fascination with the NRA? You thought they were a competing government or somehow equivalent?

The NRA has a database so it should be fine if the Federal government has one as well?

What a bunch of gibberish!
 
Is this the nature of this board's fascination with the NRA? You thought they were a competing government or somehow equivalent?

The NRA has a database so it should be fine if the Federal government has one as well?


You're smarter than that.


The issue clearly is: the agency all in a rage about a nonexistent registry shouldn't be keeping their own secret registry.
 
You're smarter than that.


The issue clearly is: the agency all in a rage about a nonexistent registry shouldn't be keeping their own secret registry.
Once again, if you believe there is a difference between political power and economic power then you shouldn't have a problem with this.

If you believe there is a no difference between political power and economic power then you should have a problem with this. You would also be wrong but that's how the lines are drawn in this thread.
 

The issue clearly is: the agency all in a rage about a nonexistent registry shouldn't be keeping their own secret registry.


. . . if you believe there is a difference between political power and economic power then you shouldn't have a problem with this.


When you don't have the facts in your favor, argue the law.

When you don't have the law in your favor, argue the facts.

When you have neither the law or the facts in your favor,
AS HERE,
just try to confuse the two.



 







When you don't have the facts in your favor, argue the law.

When you don't have the law in your favor, argue the facts.

When you have neither the law or the facts in your favor,
AS HERE,
just try to confuse the two.



Just because you're confused doesn't mean it's my fault.

Yes, the law is built around influencing every aspect of our economic lives with political power, generally using the tax code. However, there is a reason it works out terribly and creates the quality of life we have now.

A private organization is not comparable to the federal government. Being in denial of that just because you like the guy in charge doesn't change that reality.
 
A private organization is not comparable to the federal government. Being in denial of that just because you like the guy in charge doesn't change that reality.

Everyone here clearly realizes that Greed. No one is confused here and no one is confused by your attempt at obfuscation either.

The issue, as well stated by Upgrade Dave, " . . . clearly is: the agency all in a rage about a nonexistent registry shouldn't be keeping their own secret registry."

The damn hypocrisy.



But you're okay with that. :hmm:
 
So what criticism of the potential abuses by the federal government, preferably one pushed by the NRA themselves, applies to the NRA database?

Evidence of the NRA being against gun databases in general shows hypocrisy, either private, state, or federal. Is there evidence of that? I can ask you guys because apparently all things guns equal NRA.

What the NRA is doing with this database should be the news, not that they were against a federal one when people supposedly acknowledges a difference between the two.
 

Sir, the NRA is purely hypocritical.

If you want to continue in defense of it, that's cool.

Just makes you a hypocrite as well.

I'm cool with that.


 

Sir, the NRA is purely hypocritical.

If you want to continue in defense of it, that's cool.

Just makes you a hypocrite as well.

I'm cool with that.


It's only hypocritical because they disagree with your politics, and in this country that means assigning the worse motives possible.

This is why it's not credible that you see a difference between the two entities.

Is a businessman a hypocrite because he wants the government not to have for-profit enterprises like Fannie and Freddie?

Is a doctor a hypocrite if he thinks we shouldn't have a single payer system where government would administer care?

Why would the NRA be a hypocrite for doing something they don't want the government to do?

I tell people what's good for them all the time, am I a hypocrite because I don't think the government should do it?

You guys come across as so petty when you just throw around insults towards anyone against what Obama wants.
 
A private organization is not comparable to the federal government. Being in denial of that just because you like the guy in charge doesn't change that reality.

You got that right. You have less opportunity to resolve issues with a private organization than with the federal government!
 
It's only hypocritical because they disagree with your politics, and in this country that means assigning the worse motives possible.

This is why it's not credible that you see a difference between the two entities.

Is a businessman a hypocrite because he wants the government not to have for-profit enterprises like Fannie and Freddie?

Is a doctor a hypocrite if he thinks we shouldn't have a single payer system where government would administer care?

Why would the NRA be a hypocrite for doing something they don't want the government to do?
I tell people what's good for them all the time, am I a hypocrite because I don't think the government should do it?

You guys come across as so petty when you just throw around insults towards anyone against what Obama wants.

I'm going to give you credit for being smarter than this one more time but you're making it tough.
The NRA is getting people's information without their permission or knowledge. What makes them more trustworthy than "the government" (in quotes because the government isn't one thing)?
No a doctor wouldn't be a hypocrite for not wanting single payer but he would be if he takes Medicare or Medicaid patients, which are single payer style systems.

You got that right. You have less opportunity to resolve issues with a private organization than with the federal government!

:yes:
 
I'm going to give you credit for being smarter than this one more time but you're making it tough.
The NRA is getting people's information without their permission or knowledge.
This is something that is extremely extremely common in our economy. The big three credit reporting agencies immediately come to mind.

The only way this is hypocritical is if the NRA actively fought against state-level databases. According to the OP, state-level databases is how the NRA compiled its own database.

I can think of multiple ways the NRA could be hypocrites, but saying you don't want the government to do something you're doing is not evidence of hypocrisy.

What makes them more trustworthy than "the government" (in quotes because the government isn't one thing)?
I don't understand why you don't you see it, no matter how many times I point it out. There is a difference between political and economic power. To ask about trustworthiness completely misses the point.

The point of all this is whether they are hypocrites.

No a doctor wouldn't be a hypocrite for not wanting single payer but he would be if he takes Medicare or Medicaid patients, which are single payer style systems.
As long as you concede the point that doing the exact same thing you don't want the government doing doesn't make you a hypocrite. I don't agree with your qualification, but that's a minor point.
 
You got that right. You have less opportunity to resolve issues with a private organization than with the federal government!
This is just one big Kool-Aid drinking statement. This is equivalent to saying there is no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the gun.
 
Does the NRA oppose a national gun registry in the hands of government? If so, why?

Do you oppose a national gun registry in the hands of government, if so why?

Do you support a national gun registry in the private sector, i.e., the NRA? If so, why?
 
This is just one big Kool-Aid drinking statement. This is equivalent to saying there is no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the gun.


Talk about muddying an argument.

If I don't like a law, I vote out the person.

If BP poisons the Gulf of Mexico and my fishing livelihood is devastated, how do I get the board members of BP ousted?
 
You got that right. You have less opportunity to resolve issues with a private organization than with the federal government!

This is just one big Kool-Aid drinking statement. This is equivalent to saying there is no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the gun.

I didn't know that the Due Process Clause had any application to the private sector. :smh:
 
I can think of multiple ways the NRA could be hypocrites, but saying you don't want the government to do something you're doing is not evidence of hypocrisy.


As long as you concede the point that doing the exact same thing you don't want the government doing doesn't make you a hypocrite.

I'm being trolled, right?

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 4
 
Does the NRA oppose a national gun registry in the hands of government? If so, why?
I don't know anything about the nuance of their position, and don't care. Out of everything that's going on in this country, the NRA and Birthers are your concerns, so you tell me what they oppose and why.

Do you oppose a national gun registry in the hands of government, if so why?
Been there, done that. Go bump the five threads we already talked about it and respond to me there.

Do you support a national gun registry in the private sector, i.e., the NRA? If so, why?
Completely and utterly indifferent if it was obtained legally and it doesn't hurt me. I would prefer that it's accurate though.

I didn't know that the Due Process Clause had any application to the private sector. :smh:
Just like I do with thoughtone:

How does this, "This is equivalent to saying there is no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the gun."

Imply this, "I didn't know that the Due Process Clause had any application to the private sector."
 
Talk about muddying an argument.
Actually, it's an extremely clear breakdown of every disagreement your side has ever had with me.

If I don't like a law, I vote out the person.
Maybe you should start focusing on the law.

How has that worked out for you? You know, voting out the person you associate with the law then the next person embraces the law completely and extends it's reach and severity.

But then again, what do you expect when your only concern when voting is if you are on the winning side or not. Positions be damn.

If BP poisons the Gulf of Mexico and my fishing livelihood is devastated, how do I get the board members of BP ousted?
By the way this happened as well. Did you know that thoughtone? BP ruined property and lives, but BP wasn't held adequately accountable. Why was BP allowed to wreck such havoc and be subject to so many legal liabilities but face such minor consequences?

Here's some unsolicited advice you won't follow, stop worrying about ousting board members and worry about whether your government is doing it's job when people's property and Right to Life are violated. BP settled for less than six month's profit.

You should think about whether it's accurate to cite a crime when addressing what I wrote about the difference between a dollar and a gun. Unless you think your average economic dealing with a "private organization" is a crime. Your government is supposed to hold BP accountable, not you. That situation doesn't even apply to, "You have less opportunity to resolve issues with a private organization than with the federal government!"
 
You didn't like my examples?

Not really.

Don't understand how one group having a database of gun owners is any better than another group having that list. As a gun owner i don't want no parts of this.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 4
 
Not really.

Don't understand how one group having a database of gun owners is any better than another group having that list. As a gun owner i don't want no parts of this.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 4
Those are two separate issues.

One being you don't like a private organization having a database. The second being being a private organization having a database is equivalent to the federal government having a database.

You should be unambiguously against the federal government having a database, but its perfectly fine for you to be wary of a private group having the database.

Of course, by the standards of this thread, I just told you what to think. Therefore, I'm a hypocrite because I wouldn't want the government to do the same thing.
 
Those are two separate issues.

One being you don't like a private organization having a database. The second being being a private organization having a database is equivalent to the federal government having a database.

You should be unambiguously against the federal government having a database, but its perfectly fine for you to be wary of a private group having the database.

Of course, by the standards of this thread, I just told you what to think. Therefore, I'm a hypocrite because I wouldn't want the government to do the same thing.


I'm fine with both of them, to tell the truth.
As long as they're both accurate, legally obtained, and doesn't hurt me.
Throw in transparent.
 
I'm fine with both of them, to tell the truth.
As long as they're both accurate, legally obtained, and doesn't hurt me.
Throw in transparent.

But compiling this database using magazine subscriptions, gun show rosters/contests, chl class rosters....i don't know how "legally obtained" that is. I mean when i bought my gun and when i sold one i got a pamphlet about joining the nra. I politely balled them up and threw it at the person handing me the paper.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 4
 
Those are two separate issues.

One being you don't like a private organization having a database. The second being being a private organization having a database is equivalent to the federal government having a database.

You should be unambiguously against the federal government having a database, but its perfectly fine for you to be wary of a private group having the database.

Of course, by the standards of this thread, I just told you what to think. Therefore, I'm a hypocrite because I wouldn't want the government to do the same thing.

You kinda splitting hairs now.....no matter who has it, it still is what it is....a database of gun owners, possible gun owners, and gun rights activists.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 4
 
You kinda splitting hairs now.....no matter who has it, it still is what it is....a database of gun owners, possible gun owners, and gun rights activists.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 4

And, whether you're for or against reasonable gun control, there is no question that ONE of those split hairs has the power, authority and I would argue the duty and obligation, to use that database for the protection of its citizens -- and the OTHER split hair, has no such power, authority or duty or obligation so to do.

 
1. The Bill of Rights applies to the Government, not private entities.

2. The NRA has no authority to regulate or confiscate any personal property.

They look to purchase information any other advertiser of product would.
This is possibly the most stupid, and either uniformed or propagandist piece of drivel that I have seen since the Protocols of Zion bullshit.

Looks like some shit the Black Israelites spew.
 
Back
Top