Guns: how much longer will it take ....

@Glennn,

Quote:

Oh, I see. You were offering your version of how the world, in general, works. Most of us are already aware of that.

Are you now arguing for the sake of arguing? Oralloy, to whom I was replying, very obviously had not considered such.

Quote:

You seem to be blaming all of the preceding

Blame? I haven't blamed anything in this conversation. I have stated what is necessary for optimum political influence, for organisations that choose to lobby.

You seem to be having difficulty following this conversation, making inferences that aren't there. To make it clear - if I wish to:
- say something
- blame something (and I don't believe in blame)
- imply something
...it will be very clear in my writing (Ulterior motives are a ridiculous way to write). And you won't find an example on this forum of me doing otherwise.

So unfortunately, the inferences you are finding, are just made up in your head.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Quote:

To make it clear - if I wish to:
- say something
- blame something (and I don't believe in blame)
- imply something
...it will be very clear in my writing

You mean like this:

That is part of the source of the NRA's power. A major, necessary part. Just like money. If all the voters in the U.S. were to join the NRA, it's sway would still be significantly diminished if:

- it didn't advertise
- didn't hire lobbyists (needed for their connections and knowledge of the best ways influence the machinations of government)
- didn't hire political strategists / consultants / PR personnel
- didn't organise petitions well
- didn't have a unified direction
- didn't effectively message

Basically, without the above, the NRA wouldn't be providing political direction to members, meaning their votes wouldn't be influenced by it as an organisation, meaning it's position as a political player would be severely diminished (unless of course, some unifying event occurred)

To be politically influential, an organisation like the NRA relies on both a supporter base, and the ability to influence it's supporters to vote a particular way (if either is missing, politicians pay much less attention)
_________________________________________________

So, tell me, in a thread about guns, are you trying to say that all of the above is not you placing blame on those things that you believe are the problem with . . . guns?

Now, how exactly do imagine things could work out if it weren't for the NRA, the politicians, and money? What do you think would happen if these obstructions were removed from the equation?

1 Reply

I just )looked up nra funding and found less than 50% of money comes from members the rest of their funding comes from gun and ammo manufacturers.

0 Replies

@Glennn,

Quote:

You mean like this:

Yes, like that, which is very clearly an explanation of how lobbying works, and why money is necessary to it.

Quote:

Tell me, in a thread about guns, are you trying to say that all of the above is not you placing blame on those things that you believe are the problem with . .

I have no problem with any of those things I listed. They are all part of democracy, and a necessary part at that. Yet again, inferences made up in your own head.

Quote:

guns?

I'm pretty sure you and I have had this conversation before. I like guns. I still shoot. I support gun ownership. And I am also a proponent of regulation, including limiting the types of guns civilians can possess.

So yet again, stuff made up in your own head.

Quote:

Now, how exactly do imagine things could work out if it weren't for the NRA, the politicians, and money?

How on earth would I know?

You'd do a lot better not making inferences up in your own head, then insisting 'you are so implying such'. Telling people they are saying what they aren't saying, is not a thing you can 'win'. It makes for a nonsensical discussion. Which is what this discussion is.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Quote:

Yes, like that, which is very clearly an explanation of how lobbying works, and why money is necessary to it.

Let's start here. So you have no problem with the NRA. True?

Quote:

Quote:
Now, how exactly do imagine things could work out if it weren't for the NRA, the politicians, and money?

How on earth would I know?

You just listed those things in a previous post as being a problem. Remember?

That is part of the source of the NRA's power. A major, necessary part. Just like money. If all the voters in the U.S. were to join the NRA, it's sway would still be significantly diminished if:

- it didn't advertise
- didn't hire lobbyists (needed for their connections and knowledge of the best ways influence the machinations of government)
- didn't hire political strategists / consultants / PR personnel
- didn't organise petitions well
- didn't have a unified direction
- didn't effectively message
___________________________________________________

So it's a legitimate question to ask you. How exactly do imagine things could work out if it weren't for the NRA, the politicians, and the money?

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Quote:

So you have no problem with the NRA.

Did you not read where I said 'I know very little about the NRA'? I don't hold much thought on it one way or another, because I know very little about it.

You do realise I live in another country?

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Quote:

I know very little about the NRA'? I don't hold much thought on it one way or another, because I know very little about it.

Then I am correct, in that you have no problem with the NRA.

0 Replies

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

That is part of the source of the NRA's power. A major, necessary part. Just like money. If all the voters in the U.S. were to join the NRA, it's sway would still be significantly diminished if:
- it didn't advertise

Advertising needs are minimal. We already know that we don't want our civil liberties to be violated.

vikorr wrote:

- didn't hire lobbyists (needed for their connections and knowledge of the best ways influence the machinations of government)

No need to hire anyone expensive. There are plenty of freedom-loving Americans who are happy to communicate to Congress that we do not want our civil liberties to be violated.

vikorr wrote:

- didn't hire political strategists / consultants / PR personnel

We already know the strategy. If they violate our civil liberties, vote 'em out of office.

vikorr wrote:

- didn't organise petitions well

Telling us that something is going on and we need to start calling our congressmen doesn't cost the NRA very much.

vikorr wrote:

- didn't have a unified direction
- didn't effectively message

We have that. It doesn't cost much.

vikorr wrote:

Basically, without the above, the NRA wouldn't be providing political direction to members, meaning their votes wouldn't be influenced by it as an organisation, meaning it's position as a political player would be severely diminished (unless of course, some unifying event occurred)

To be politically influential, an organisation like the NRA relies on both a supporter base, and the ability to influence it's supporters to vote a particular way (if either is missing, politicians pay much less attention)

But it doesn't cost the NRA much money to do all of that.

We already know that we like freedom. Informing us who is a danger to that freedom doesn't cost the NRA all that much.

Perhaps if they have extra money the NRA can run TV adds against bad congressmen. But it isn't a necessary. We can go after bad congressmen even without TV ads.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

The guy who holds the all time record for elephants was using a Swiss military rifle with ordinary 30cal ammo of some sort. He was a sort of an expert in elephant anatomy and was making head shots.

7 x 57 Spanish Mauser I think. 175 grain bullets in that caliber are very long and penetrate deeply.

6.5 x 55 Swedish Mauser with 160 grain bullets would work in a similar manner.

That is on the extreme light end of what can be used though. Legally you generally need a minimum of 9.3 x 62 Mauser or 9.3 x 74R (the double barrel equivalent) to hunt CXP4 game. And most makers of deep penetrating solid rifle slugs don't make them any smaller than 9.3mm. So those calibers are generally the minimum size for an elephant gun.

On the heavy end (for bolt actions at least) the .510 Wells wildcat provides very reliable stopping power. The cartridge is made by taking .460 Weatherby brass and necking it up to .50 caliber. Ammo manufacturers commonly make 600 grain solids in .50 caliber. And since the .460 Weatherby is roughly the same dimensions as the .410 Rigby, all you really need to do for a rifle is buy a .410 Rigby and swap in a .50 caliber barrel. No need for a super-expensive custom-built rifle like with some other exotic rounds.

Just thinking about the recoil of firing a 600 grain round at 2400 feet per second hurts my shoulder though.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

That JP muzzle brake would be the only way to go.

https://media.mwstatic.com/product-images/880x660/Primary/603/603848.jpg

0 Replies

George Digweed, ultimate shotgun sports,nearly 600 crows in one day with a $30,000 shotgun made for sporting clays competition...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Cn6MEymVXk&t=62s

0 Replies

The other thing you could do with a heavy magnum caliber rifle would be something like that kickoff system which Baretta uses for the shotguns with 3.5" chambers i.e. an automotive style shock absorber in the stock of the rifle.

0 Replies

https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/50423311_2277663832558826_5343024141828096000_n.jpg?_nc_cat=107&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=e0d3f4290a55690c08ee166866d21659&oe=5CCBD6F1

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

No need to hire anyone expensive.

oralloy wrote:

It doesn't cost much.

oralloy wrote:

But it doesn't cost the NRA much money to do all of that.

It didn't take much effort to find articles outlining just how right I was (and quite frankly, the NRA would be foolish to lobby in any other manner)

https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/the-impact-of-nra-on-the-american-policy-2332-0761-1000222.php?aid=83220&view=mobile

Quote:

The NRA goes to a great length and spends a large amount of money on lobbying to defend the Constitution – the right to bear arms. In 2013, the NRA spent on lobbying $3,410,000, while in 2014, it spent $3,360,000 [3]

Quote:

the NRA created its own gun magazines, gun shops, and gun clubs across the country. The association uses these magazines as an advertisement to spread its message across the country.

Quote:

Money is power and the NRA understands that. The NRA operates on a budget of quarter of a billion dollars. The organization has total assets worth $163 million. The NRA uses this money on lobbying, PACs, runs ads for policy makers that their interest aligns with theirs, and runs ads against policy makers that are not pro-gun.

https://qz.com/1214801/nra-advertising-agency-ackerman-mcqueen-built-a-media-empire-to-push-guns/

Quote:

But among its partners, arguably the most valuable is still by their side: Oklahoma-based Ackerman McQueen, the NRA’s longterm advertising and PR agency. For decades, this firm has honed the pro-gun narrative, establishing gun rights as a core value for conservative voters and as a pillar of America’s identity.

That took me all of five minutes to find and paste into here. I'm very sure that a longer search would turn up much more.

I really don't see why you want to believe that the money doesn't matter. Matter is power in the Western world. Votes work, but unified votes combined with advertising, combined with lobbying, works much better.

1 Reply

Cvetlana's friend with her sniper rifle...

http://russian7.ru/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/snayper20052016.jpg

0 Replies

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

That took me all of five minutes to find and paste into here. I'm very sure that a longer search would turn up much more.

The fact that the NRA spends money does not change the fact that they have massive power even without that money.

vikorr wrote:

I really don't see why you want to believe that the money doesn't matter.

Because I'm involved with the gun rights movement and have first hand experience.

vikorr wrote:

Matter is power in the Western world. Votes work, but unified votes combined with advertising, combined with lobbying, works much better.

Money is nice. But as long as you have votes, money isn't essential.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

The nra did not havevthe votes in the midterms and the majority of the country now regards them unfavorably thanks to parkland and our daily diet of shootings. Its base is dyi g or moving to the city. It'll be in DeepTrouble by 2020

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

The nra did not havevthe votes in the midterms and the majority of the country now regards them unfavorably thanks to parkland and our daily diet of shootings.

THe NRA actually had nothing to do with the Parkland shooting, you can blame that on the leadership of the city and country of Parkland. The NRA actually has nothing to do with any of the shootings in this nation.

Quote:

Its base is dyi g or moving to the city. It'll be in DeepTrouble by 2020

Oddly enough, a majority of the gun crimes to include murder, take place in the cities, which are run by the anti-gun goons. So let the anti-gun people move the "cities", they are actually the one's most in need of protection from bad guys.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

The fact that the NRA spends money does not change the fact that they have massive power even without that money.

I don't think you'll find me having denied this anywhere.

The amount of power though would be greatly reduced. Money works, or they wouldn't spend it on politics.

Remember this conversation started with you saying that money has nothing to do with their power.

2 Replies

If they let trump declare a national emergency on the wall all we have to do is elect a democratic president who will bypass congress with their own national emergency and remove all the gun nuts weapons while leaving we liberals with our guns for self defense. Works for me.

3 Replies

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know