1. […] Miguel notices CSGV has busted one of NRA’s most closely guarded secrets wide open […]

2. Do we get to go into schools and “just snap” and start shooting and have the NRA pick up our legal costs with this membership?

   Oh wait, whenever spree shooters are confronted by some armed resistance (i.e. firearms; often carried by the police that arrive too late to save many) they shoot themselves. So what is the value of this special membership type?

   Also, I would think that the NRA’s support for concealed carry would foil my plans to just flip out and shoot everyone over a parking space because someone could immediately shoot back. Seems like the NRA needs to rethink this “Irresponsible Gun Owner” membership type.

   I think the NRA wants lots of irresponsible gun owners because that totally helps them politically and with their bottom line, too.

   Now seriously, what the hell is wrong with the retards at CSGV?

3. If I knew, I would demand that Obamacare should cover it.

4. Oh hell, they’ll think it’s real… After all, they believe in unicorns and rainbow farts…

5. Well, I wouldn’t say it’s ONLY about protecting the irresponsible gun owners. I would say it’s ALSO about protecting them in order to not inconvenience yourselves.

   I guess you knew that and it’s a victory of sorts that you make us defend a point that you already concede.

   Keep fighting the good fight.

6. And more Pzychedelic Zen from Mike at the Bamboo Hotel in Rome.

7. Sorry MikeB your grasp of sarcasm is weak. I mock nonsensical comments. The point is the NRA does not offer “get of jail free” support for its members. If they do commit a crime, they go through the legal/criminal prosecution process just like everyone else. Been in Rome too long? We still do have laws against rape, assault, robbery and murder (and no gun is required to make these charges applicable).

   The NRA opposes silly laws that anti-rights activists propose which do nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Rather, silly laws like waiting periods and bans on made-up classifications like “assault weapons” just keeps firearms away from law-abiding citizens and hinders their self-defense. It is all part of the anti-rights proponents incremental process to place so many restrictions that the “death of a thousand cuts” limits our firearms ownership.

   What did I concede? Nothing, read carefully just the above quoted post to which my comments are solely directed towards. To paraphrase, it argues that the NRA protects IRRESPONSIBLE gun owners to support their financial success. That is laughable. The very large number of law-abiding, and BTW also responsible, NRA members shows this belief to be silly. Unless of course, you are trying to say that owning a gun is, by definition, irresponsible.

8. Damn. Old NFO knew what MikeB was going to write an hour before he wrote it…

   Mike, you are an idiot. The legislation you propose does not work, it demonstrably infringes on rights, and it will not matter to people who are going to break the law anywise. It would do you and your cause a world of good if you would stop misrepresenting yourself, speciously attacking us, and proposing idiocy which has a repeated history of failing, miserably.

9. Muggy, I love these little snippets of the antis that you have been posting, keep it up please. So sorry that you attracted MikeB.
   Gail

10. Muggy? So how bad is the humidity up there in the Jaxxes? LOL

11. Do I get Irresponsible Gun Owner training if I get such a membership? I’d imagine such training would teach me the Four Rules of Safety, and what I can do to violate them. 😉

12. It may be fake, but it’s pretty funny.

Comments are closed.