NRA Gives Ajit Pai 'Courage Award' and Gun For 'Saving the Internet' (arstechnica.com) 563
The National Rifle Association (NRA) today gave its Charlton Heston Courage Under Fire Award to Ajit Pai, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. "Pai was about to speak at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Maryland when the award presentation seemed to catch him by surprise," reports Ars Technica. "The award is a handmade long gun that could not be brought on stage, so it will be housed in the NRA museum until Pai can receive it." From the report: "Ajit Pai, as you probably already know, saved the Internet," American Conservative Union (ACU) Executive Director Dan Schneider told the audience. The ACU is the host of CPAC; Schneider made a few more remarks praising Pai before handing the award presentation over to NRA board member Carolyn Meadows. Pai "fought to preserve your free speech rights" as a member of the FCC's Republican minority during the Obama administration, Schneider said. Pai "fought and won against all odds, but the Obama administration had some curveballs and they implemented these regulations to take over the Internet." "As soon as President Trump came into office, President Trump asked Ajit Pai to liberate the Internet and give it back to you," Schneider added. "Ajit Pai is the most courageous, heroic person that I know."
The signature achievement that helped Pai win the NRA courage award came in December when the FCC voted to eliminate net neutrality rules. The rules, which are technically still on the books for a while longer, prohibited Internet service providers from blocking and throttling lawful Internet traffic and from charging online services for prioritization. Schneider did not explain how eliminating net neutrality rules preserved anyone's "free speech rights." Right Wing Watch posted a video of the ceremony.
The signature achievement that helped Pai win the NRA courage award came in December when the FCC voted to eliminate net neutrality rules. The rules, which are technically still on the books for a while longer, prohibited Internet service providers from blocking and throttling lawful Internet traffic and from charging online services for prioritization. Schneider did not explain how eliminating net neutrality rules preserved anyone's "free speech rights." Right Wing Watch posted a video of the ceremony.
Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Just wow. I really hope these motherfuckers have a good view of each other when they're burning in hell.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
These are not related issues
You are literally commenting on an article about the NRA (that's guns, dumbass) has given an award to Ajit Pai (that's net neutrality, dumber ass).
That must be among the top ten most unspeakably stupid comments of the last week on Slashdot. Possibly even the last year.
Re: (Score:3)
I feel sick. sick to my stomach.
the ghouls are running things, they are happy as pigs in shit and they have ZERO idea that they are living in an opposite-world of reality.
this proves - more than anything - that we have 2 (or even more) countries in the US. we'll NEVER meet in the middle. it has not happened and we are drawing even farther apart as each day passes.
I see a civil war happening.
I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
>they have ZERO idea that they are living in an opposite-world of reality
Nope. They know damn well wtf they are doing. Playing dumb is a very effective strategy.
Continuing to insist down is up creates doubt in reality that can be exploited. Milions of people are buying what they are selling.
It's that "I see four lights!" shit.
Re: (Score:2)
I see a civil war happening.
I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am.
Roger Stone, Trumpy advisor, already warned that getting rid of The Donald would result in Civil War.
Remove him then (Score:5, Interesting)
Roger Stone, Trumpy advisor, already warned that getting rid of The Donald would result in Civil War.
I'm happy to call his bluff and take the chance.
Re: Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not civil war over the internet, it's guns, it's the environment, increasing the debt to give money to rich people, it's the fact that medicine and education, which are necessary to live, are becoming too expensive to have. The theme is to take everything to give to one group and leave scorched earth behind. It isn't just greed, it's unsustainable absorbing of everything from everywhere. Mosquitoes bite and have a meal, these suck until the corpse is bone dry.
I am sorry, but I don't want a mad max future for our schools where everyone is armed. You know they already had school drills for shootings in florida and still people died, right? And with net neutrality gone, you get whatever content your internet provider lets you have, like the cable company. Sorry, you didn't buy the youtube/facebook package, just the wikipedia one. That's another $29.95 per month.
And sure, let's do more offshore drilling and slick our beaches with oil and either kill or make inedible our remaining fish. Great idea! And while we are at it, we can forcibly export a third of my classmates to Mexico. They may have lived here for as long as they can remember, but whatever. At least they won't get shot in their new Mexican school.
This gift of a gun from one group actively destroying our country to another actively destroying and then a speech by consevatives praising their destruction shows they all sip drinks down at the local country club together. They are actively plotting the destruction of our country. If that is not a reason for civil war, I don't know what is.
But let's try voting these assholes out first. Internet shame them for their positions. Call out the lies and double speak. They say they are making things better, or "great again". But these are crimes and they need to be documented and prosecuted. And if that doesn't work, the guns will follow.
Re: (Score:3)
NRA doesn't get the point of 2nd amendment (Score:5, Insightful)
NRA doesn't seem to grasp the purpose of the second amendment, IMHO.
The sole purpose of keeping and bearing arms for the public is so they can overturn a government that doesn't serve the people.
That was fine at the time the constitution was written, but now it's not enough to own a rifle if you want to make sure the government doesn't oppress it's people.
Internet, social media and mobile phones has made mass surveillance and profiling of the entire population almost a trivial task.
Want to know who has opposing political views? Want to know who their friends are?
Want to know who they meet?
It's just a query away.
Mass surveillance is now a much more dangerous tool for those wanting to oppress a population than guns ever was. And having one yourself doesn't help at all. The Arab-spring let people to believe that social media empowered people, but that is only true if the ones that oppress do not control all platforms. Turned against the people it's a scary tool.
The NRA should not get involved on the corporate side of regulating the internet. If they want to protect the 2nd amendment and it's true purpose then they should consider who they publicly support. A guy who wants to take away the right for people to use the internet outside of the walled gardens of corporations does not have the people best internest at heart.
Re: NRA doesn't get the point of 2nd amendment (Score:3)
How about they donâ(TM)t care about the real purpose of the 2nd amendment, as long as they can fill their coffers with money from gun sales? Sometimes it feels more like a religious cult that has far too much power and influence.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
What happened to that wounded security guard who was first to confront the gunman in Las Vegas? Shouldn't he be the one getting the 'courage award' from the NRA?
Aji Pai will be getting millions for fucking over the American people. And now, he's getting around the clock protection from the Secret Service. What he did doesn't require courage.
That security guard in Vegas, on the other hand, was probably getting paid barely above minimum wage for confronting a gunman with multiple assault weapons.
Re: (Score:3)
Just wow. I really hope these motherfuckers have a good view of each other when they're burning in hell.
I know right? Zuckerberg's power to shape political discourse - at no cost - was getting out of hand. Wait...those are the motherfuckers you were talking about, right?
Re: (Score:3)
Damn Straight. An I hope that there is a position open for tour guide. "Off to the left fellow deceased slashdotters, you see Ajit Pail. Please feel free to piss on him as we go by."
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
I know 1984 was about the extreme left, but these days the Newspeak seems to be coming from the other side (saving the internet, fake news, alternative facts, clean coal, ... the list grows every day).
Curious, I always thought it was a parable of the resurrection of ultra right-wing Nazism..
It wasn't about the left or the right it was about extreme authoritarianism.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Wow (Score:5, Informative)
Speaking of George Orwell's novel1984, Teun stated:
Curious, I always thought it was a parable of the resurrection of ultra right-wing Nazism...
Prompting Z00L00K to sneer:
Hello Godwin's law.
Fail. Hard, hard fail.
In a discussion about a famous literary work the setting and premise of which is the soul-crushing effect on individuals of life in a totalitarian state which exercises uncompromising control over every aspect of its citizens' lives to the degree that it dictates their employment of vocabulary specifically designed to obfuscate and reverse the meaning of established words, it is entirely appropriate for a participant to state that he or she believed that the book itself was about Nazism.
Godwin's Law does not apply here, in any way, shape, or form.
Had Teun said something like, "Ajit Pai is a Nazi," or, "CPAQ is just a bunch of Nazis," or even, "You must be a Nazi sympathizer," then Godwin's Law would, indeed, have been invoked. In the above case, which is absent of any trace of ad hominem, it absolutely does not ...
Re: (Score:3)
I averred:
Godwin's Law does not apply here, in any way, shape, or form.
Prompting Ungrounded Lightning to reprove:
Acdtually it does. Because Godwins law is just that, if a thread goes on long enough, Nazis or Nazism will be mentioned.
What does not apply are a couple of the usual misinterpretations of Godwin's law (which are very handy for neo-Naziis): That any mention of Nazis is just trolling rather than an honest attempt to learn from history to avoid repeating it, or that once Nazis are mentioned the discussion is over.
Sorry, but you're incorrect. Godwin's Law is: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1."
First of all, the comments that Z00L00K incorrectly invoked Godwin's Law were on a separate issue than the main thread - which is to say they were off-topic to begin with, and should rightly be considered as a distinct thread of their own. Secondly (and most crucially), there was no comparison to Hitl
Re: Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
That was the name they gave themselves, yes. Can't recall a whole lot of socialist policies though. Any more than the "communist" regimes in China and the Soviet union showed any trace of actual communism. ("Workers own the means of production" is not compatible with "Government owns the means of production, and workers have no voice" - that's Fascism, plain and simple.)
Authoritarian governments will march under whatever flag will raise the rabble to put them in power - Socialism, Communism, Capitalism, doesn't matter which -ism is on the flag, it's just a flag. The truth is in the actual government policy.
Re: Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Authoritarian governments will march under whatever flag
This. Although, just to note,
It wasn't about the left or the right it was about extreme authoritarianism.
The only numbers I've seen show that the last 20 years, the Republicans have officially put their hat in the ring for title 'the authoritarian party'. https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Donald "I can shoot someone in Manhattan" Trump did after all win bigly with the R's.
I know I'll get downvotes for "bias", but I'm sorry, these are just facts. I'm willing to be convinced with opposing numbers, please show them.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
The NRA award is stupid because what Ajit Pai did was harming the Internet rather than saving it.
Anyway, the most ridiculous thing about this is that the Internet is a world-wide network that Pai or even the whole FCC couldn't possibly either save or destroy, whichever they decide to prefer. They simply can't do any of that. All they can do is to screw up the Internet for Americans.
Re: (Score:3)
That boat sailed ages ago. The "NRA" opposes (with astonishing absolutist vehemence) the most basic commonsense background check rules that are supported by the majority of its own members.
The "NRA" has been successful in keeping its membership, but not by actually listening to them. It is a top down organization, and its leadership is simply part of the hard right corporatiss. Its only principle is what is to support whatever corporations (gun makers, ISPs) want.
By the way did you know that one of the five
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, this just clinches it. Apparently there is no principle behind 'conservative' positions today other than "we've decided where the lines are, and we stand on the opposite side from the people we don't like - no matter the issue or the practical implications". It's all - and only - about tribalism. And the tribes are being organized and defined by moneyed interests who know how to manipulate them. Congratulations, America.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sorry to say, (Score:4, Insightful)
that I honestly laughed at this. It came across so powerfully as a funny parody, and I found myself laughing both before and after I realized that they're actually fucking serious. There are no words. Stick a fork in the ass of American social discourse and turn it over, because it is well and truly done.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In my opinion this goes against what they usually claim NRA stands for. It's not funny - it's crazy.
Perhaps this will have the positive effect that the NRA is split into reasonable people and the absolutely crazies. Probably not.
Okay, now they're just trolling us (Score:5, Funny)
What's next, a lifetime achievement award for Harvey Weinstein?
Re: Okay, now they're just trolling us (Score:2)
Sure, the man's a hero. Just think of all the aspiring actresses he saved from a life of obscurity!
Re: (Score:2)
Next, NRA gives Martin Shkreli an award shaped like a gun... hey, maybe these awards aren't replicas. Maybe they work. And maybe each one comes with one bullet.
Where's the satire tag? (Score:2)
This is satire right? Isn't it? I keep looking for the tag but I can't find it.
Early April Fools prank? No? FFS what is going on?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh... they're just trolling us right? They weren't serious... they couldn't be. Right?
This is Why... (Score:2)
...a lot of gun owners don't like the NRA. They seem to think the R stands for Republican.
Follow the money (Score:5, Interesting)
Sadly this is not off topic:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/18/trump-nra-fbi-alexander-torshin-russia-investigation
The FBI is investigating whether a Russian banker with close ties to Vladimir Putin funneled money through the National Rifle Association to support Donald Trumpâ(TM)s presidential campaign....The NRA spent at least $30m to back Trumpâ(TM)s 2016 campaign for president...News outlets have been examining ties and meetings between NRA leaders and Russia for months, including a 2015 NRA delegation to Moscow that included meetings with influential Putin allies....
You get the picture?
Not The Onion? (Score:5, Insightful)
At first I thought this had to be an Onion piece. The two most corrupt dirtbags, in the most corrupt political system outside a third world dictatorship, giving each other a hand job at CPAC.
This is the pathetic level to which conservatives have sunk.
Guns, the obvious solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
What does the NRA have to do with the FCC? (Score:5, Insightful)
AFACT, absolutely nothing, other than that they both hold policy positions that antagonize liberals.
The fact that they are giving each other awards suggests to me that the only thing holding the Republican Party together these days is their collective urge to "piss on the other team".
Fun, in a sort of Lord-of-the-Flies, junior-high-locker-room-towel-snapping sort of way, but not exactly a viable long-term philosophy for running a first-world country. Hopefully when the Republicans get their asses handed to them by voters this fall they will remember that they are expected to serve the country's interests, not just snap towels at the nerds.
Re: What does the NRA have to do with the FCC? (Score:2)
I understand their urge.
Democrats are seeking to widen their support among most vocal, most politically active minorities in increasingly fast changing world of Western ethics.
The acceleration of this progress could only increase blow back from people who 50 years ago hardly could be called "old conservative" farts.
If in older times only 60 year olds hold their now conservative views from the times of their youth, nowadays it shifted to 35-40 years old.
Liberal acceleration of social ethics change recruits y
Gag me (Score:2)
with a bar of soap.
The New Brown Shirts (Score:5, Insightful)
Listening to CPAC on CSPAN today I couldn’t believe how deranged these people all seem. I really feel like the NRA was threatening armed insurrection if Donald Trump is removed from office. Core beliefs: there is no Global Warming (or doesn’t matter much); Democrats and liberals are part of a Socialist plot to take all our rights away; immigrants are destroying our culture; everyone who needs (deserves) healthcare will have it (only lucky well-paid working people deserve it); luck and privilege are not factors in obtaining wealth, only hard work is.
When Trump goes down (and he will) I fear what these groups will do. They’ve made it clear what their guns are for when push comes to shove.
Re: (Score:2)
The good news is that most gun-owners are strongly authoritarian. That's pretty much their motivating essence. So it's possible to get them to do stuff by appealing to authority effectively. It's what the NRA et al have been doing for the past thirty years. It just needs a ju jitsu move to use the same tricks in the other direction.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Trump is going down sooner or later no matter what. Most likely time is in 2020 when he most likely loses his re-election.
Should the NRA then fuel an armed insurrection because DEMOCRACY got rid of Trump?
Re: (Score:2)
Even if people would be blind to his corruption he could still lose they way he won, by chance.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So I said I fear. You have now shown I should fear. Way to vividly validate my points. BTW by going down I meant impeachment, at some point even Republicans won't be able to stomach this administration.
Calling BS (Score:2, Troll)
I think this post is bull. There's NOTHING on the NRA's website about this. You'd think there would be.
Re: Calling BS (Score:2)
Reuters reported this too. They had a reporter at the event,
Fascism at work (Score:4, Insightful)
Here you have it folks, a perfect example of fascism at work. Corporations slowly but surely establishing their power over governement and the people. Legislators, media, weapons, etc. All the tools necessary to enforce totalitarism.
And they'll succeed, too, because a little more than half of the population are too ignorant, clueless and gullible to see what's going on.
"All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing". And these days, I see a hell of a lot of good men doing a hell of a lot of nothing.
Will make it extra ironic... (Score:2, Insightful)
...when digital stream services start dropping NRAtv and they complain about large media companies censoring them.
The NRA is overstepping its bounds. (Score:5, Interesting)
There are many moderates and even *gasp* liberals who like guns! If my experience is an indication of the rest of the country's gun-owning-but-not-far-right population, the NRA is going to continue losing membership and support. I may consider renewing my membership if they ever go back to what they used to be, but in the meanwhile I'll direct my money and energies elsewhere.
They do not need any of you. (Score:5, Insightful)
The NRA is owned by industry, the issue group front is just to make them more powerful lobbyist. The drug industry would love to hijack the AARP like the NRA has been.
They want you for the influence you can give them and nothing more.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There are other organizations that will track shooting scores without supporting school massacres.
USPSA and Orion are two that come to mind.
CPAC is a gun-free zone (Score:5, Informative)
They really buried the lede in this story. See that part where it says the NRA gave Pai the rifle, but he couldn't bring it on stage with him at CPAC? Do you know why Pai couldn't bring his prize with him on stage at CPAC? Because CPAC, with all it's gunhumping and masturbatory 2nd Amendment cosplay is a gun-free zone.
Got that? The "Conservative Political Action Conference" with its keynote from Wayne LaPierre and wild cheering for the notion of giving schoolteachers guns and for watering the tree of liberty, and a good-guy with a gun horseshit does not allow guns at its conference.
Conservatives - there is just no bottom to their hypocrisy.
https://i.redditmedia.com/vzdl... [redditmedia.com]
Re: (Score:2)
So CPAC was willing to give up it's member's rights for the convenience of having their conference at the Marriott? Why not have it at a Trump Hotel?
Re: (Score:3)
Well, we've learned that the NRA and/or Republicans are opposed to gun free zones unless it's their own cowardly asses on the line.
Gun-free zones are not for schoolchildren. They're not for churches, shopping malls or Chuck E Cheese. Gun free zones are for protecting right-wing cowards.
The NRA is a terrorist organization. (Score:3, Insightful)
They have and continue to support mass murder. Any politician, from any party, who accepts their money, should be thrown out of office. Once we've purged the parasite that is the NRA, we can start working on repealing the 2nd amendment.
I just don't get it (Score:5, Insightful)
They condemn the school guard who waited 4 minutes (sic) with his pistol outside.
When 2 patrolmen see 1 guy wielding a revolver in a bank full of people, the call for reinforcement, block the streets, call SWAT, FBI and whatnot... and those guys have bulletproof vests, shotguns ...
And this single guy was supposed to go against an unknown number of killing, suicidal shooters on speed, with armor, assault guns, large mags with armor-penetrating ammo with his pistol alone?
And he didn't even know where in the building they were.
Are they crazy?
Same thing for arming teachers, what are they going to do?
They will sit in a wardrobe with their .38 in hand shitting their pants and then accidentally kill the student who wants to seek refuge in the same wardrobe.
Correction Needed (Score:5, Informative)
Carolyn Meadows of the National Rifle Association (NRA), who is also and member of the American Conservative Union (ACU), gave the ACU's Charlton Heston Courage Under Fire Award to Ajit Pai.
Re: (Score:3)
Either way- my understanding is that it has always been an award from the ACU itself.. it just usually seems to be handed out by NRA executives.
Irony.... (Score:3)
Irony is that by celebrating the end of Net Neutrality, they're opening up the possibility for ISPs to block the NRA!
I mean, gun owners are a fairly hard core group, so why shouldn't ISPs now create a "gun lover's package" or set of packages? Access to the NRA and other gun related forums all for another $50 a month? Less than what you spend on ammo a month!
And the NRA's cheering the guy that's making it happen...
Circle Jerk (Score:2, Insightful)
If anyone needed a practical real world example of the filthiest scum circle jerking while they slowly ruin the country, this is it. I expect Trump to come in and serenade them both with a speech on tax cuts.
Axis of Fuckwittery (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, stick to your purpose (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't imagine why the NRA would do this. The NRA has a very specific purpose. Well actually there are two NRA groups, each with a specific purpose. One does gun-related safety training and such, the other defends the second amendment in the political arena. Neither has any business taking a stand on any particular regulations related to things around principles of network neutrality. It's not what they were created and funded to do.
Re: Yes, stick to your purpose (Score:2)
Re: Yes, stick to your purpose (Score:5, Informative)
The NRA is the lobby for gun manufacturers. Nothing more nothing less
No, they're more than that. They're a heat shield for gun manufacturers. NRA VP Wayne LaPierre acts like a rodeo clown to distract public sentiment away from them.
Re: (Score:3)
The NRA is the lobby for gun manufacturers. Nothing more nothing less
So what you're saying is that you have no idea what you're talking about, and have never sat down with anyone who DOES know what they're talking about. Congrats on parroting someone else's incorrect political talking point.
The NRA delivers (compared, for example, to high profile lefty people spreading political cash around) a tiny amount of their members' money to campaigns. What they deliver is the intensely passionate action of actual human voters. That's what causes some legislators to pause when con
Re: (Score:3)
The NRA is the lobby for gun manufacturers. Nothing more nothing less
This is a very common error, but the fact that it's so common does not make it less of an error. Even the most rudimentary analysis of NRA funding shows that it's false.
Re:Yes, stick to your purpose (Score:5, Interesting)
In the last couple decades, I've witnessed the transformation of the NRA from a firearm advocacy group into the armed wing of a very specific type of social conservatives, the Fox News social conservatives that worship Trump as their messiah. I don't know how their "Christian Values" can reconcile with their moral dexterity in accepting an serial sexual predator.
NRA has no business giving awards to a telecommunication lobbyist that has done little to advocate for firearm owners, except as a swampy favor to its new buddy Trump. This is the type of crony capitalism NRA used to nuts over during the Clinton years.
I used to enjoy reading American Rifleman but I started to question NRA's political stance during the GWB years when our Constitution was tramped by the Patriot Acts. By the Obama years, I skip all the political articles and stopped all donations. These days, I don't even bother reading the American Rifleman. The only reason I didn't cancel the subscription is because I don't feel like saving the NRA any money.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that unchecked proliferation of high capacity magazine fed semi automatic rifles in a polarized society with limited social safety net will eventually lead to the carnage we are witnessing today. We keep this up, in a few years we'll have open street warfare between the various armed militias, all vying to protect their own interpretation our Constitution from each other.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow... that is the most logical, succinct assessment of the situation I have seen. Thanks.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Yes, stick to your purpose (Score:5, Informative)
The NRA is pretty much the only organization left sticking up for the Constitution, and I don't see anything in the Constitution giving an unelected body the power to regulate speech just because it's on computers.
Pai deserves a reward for sticking up for the Constitution and removing burdensome government regulation from the Internet.
Net Neutrality did not regulate speech. It stipulated rules that prevented internet providers from regulating it.
Re:Yes, stick to your purpose (Score:5, Insightful)
Net Neutrality did not regulate speech. It stipulated rules that prevented internet providers from regulating it.
That's funny, because I'm pretty sure the social media giants - and even wikipedia - were doing a pretty decent job of regulating speech with these magical rules in place.
If that is true and if that pisses you off you are perfectly free to set up your own platform on a free internet. On an internet where internet providers have total freedom able to throttle the traffic to and from sites for whatever reason they see fit to do so they'd be free to throttle your new alternative platform into oblivion. That is the difference between a world with net neutrality and a world where corporate oligarchs have a carte blanche on muzzling you without having to justify why they chose to do so and apparently the NRA thinks we are better off with this latter option. Net neutrality is not a right/left issue, it should be of paramount concern to everybody across the political spectrum.
Re: (Score:2)
Constitution
Quit using that word. You have no fucking idea what's written in it.
Re:Yes, stick to your purpose (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The ACLU dosent work on the second amendment because there are already powerful organizations that do that. maybe you've heard of them? The ACLU is not nearly as wealthy as the NRA so they have to pick their battles. Not actually as "Evil" as your Childish noise makes it out to be.
Hello. (Score:2, Insightful)
As the Marine general said the other day "Do those people not understand one company of Marines can take out an entire small city?" The only thing it's guaranteeing is your ability to shoot up your neighbors.
Re: (Score:3)
As the Marine general said the other day "Do those people not understand one company of Marines can take out an entire small city?" The only thing it's guaranteeing is your ability to shoot up your neighbors.
Need to ask the Vietnamese about that.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Yes, stick to your purpose (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
The majority of Americans disagree with you on DC vs Heller. Even Slate, no fan of the right, concede that.
http://www.slate.com/articles/... [slate.com]
Heller is a much better choice. Scalia wasn't just the deciding vote. He wrote the opinion. Americans support his position and the right it protected. In a CNN/ORC poll taken in June 2008, just before Heller, 67 percent of Americans said the Second Amendment guaranteed "that each individual has the right to own a gun," not just "the right of citizens to form a militia." In a 2012 Pew poll, 67 percent opposed "banning the possession of handguns except by law enforcement officers." In a CNN/ORC poll, also taken in 2012, 89 percent opposed "preventing all Americans from owning guns"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
True. In fact the reason the US is a representative republic and not a democracy is so that demagogues can't convince an impassioned mob to remove rights from the minority.
Re: (Score:2)
Ready to try again?
Re: Yes, stick to your purpose (Score:2)
The bulk of the group's money now comes in the form of contributions, grants, royalty income, and advertising, much of it originating from gun industry sources.
Since 2005, the gun industry and its corporate allies have given between $20 million and $52.6 million to it through the NRA Ring of Freedom sponsor program.
Ooooooo, scary! That's a whole $6.5 million per year! I wonder what the NRAs total annual revenue is?
Oh. Wait. Its over $400 million.
Re: (Score:2)
Literally could not get more American. [...] he's going to arm teachers, thereby removing the overwhelming majority of gun-free zones in the US, is fucking amazing
If you define the core of Americanness as mass shootings, then yes, that would literally not be more American. I greatly enjoyed my stay in the US, and while I'm not sure I could define precisely what constitutes "American", I am 100% sure that mass shootings is not it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, because kids going to school under the barrel of a gun really screams "freedom".
No, it actually screams dystopian police state nightmare. It's the very anti-thesis of freedom when kids have to go to school on the barrel of a gun of the authorities, in fact, it's probably the most un-free scenario imaginable.
The more you equip people with arms, the more people are prevented from being truly free, because they're only moments away from someone who is anti-freedom taking their life because they didn't lik
Re: (Score:2)
Presidents of the USofA should not be in that position purely for the party that supported their election but instead to bring all Americans together to form a stronger nation.
Trump with his Pai and NRA is only making the divisions deeper.
Re: (Score:2)
Then the second amendment will be amended to give the guns to the MPAA / RIAA / AT&T / Comcast so they can shoot you for being a pirate, while blocking your ability to bitch about not having a fair trial.
Re: (Score:2)
It's probably up to the venue and not CPAC.
BTW guess how many percent of mass shootings took place in gun free zones?
https://www.dailywire.com/news... [dailywire.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
CPAC could have chosen another venue, couldn't they? I'm not sure why you're giving them a free pass, especially given how it puts their delegates at risk per the article you linked to.
Re: (Score:2)
This was a trained professional to respond to these situations.
You probably think teachers are going to be better trained than a police officer to respond to an active shooter. Are teachers going to get hazard pay now?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Double whammy. (Score:5, Insightful)
No idea if the corresponding media sources on "the left" are as bad about calling things "The Right", because I don't really watch that shit.. I have a nausea-inducing aversion to feeling like I'm standing in an echo chamber, and I don't really need to hear Rachel Maddow drum up stupid fucking reasons for me to be liberal, or construct dumb ass arguments for why that's better than conservative.
All I know is I don't even know if it's politics anymore... It's something sicker than that.
America has never really had a left-wing, and these guys aren't quite Nazis, yet. But they're talking more and more like them.
Re: (Score:2)
You know you could provide counter examples, if you can find them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Pai legislation is only positive for the wealthiest of companies, the rest are left by the wayside.
Pai's legislation (or lack thereof) is like admitting the guy with the biggest truck always has the right of way.
Re: (Score:3)