MNGunTalk.com

They said Wayne wanted to send me a flag for donating $140 or extending my membership 5 years.

I asked how beneficial it is to extend a Benefactor Life membership for 5 years?

Then I told them after what Wayne did on bumpstocks I'm not giving them another dime until he's gone.

Then I said thanks for the call and hung up.

They had been peppering me with calls over the past few months. I took advantage of the renewal of 5 years for $125. if I want to send more $ I know where they are. I don't want the phone calls and I block all numbers I don't recognize when they leave no msg.

I don't answer calls from numbers my phone does not know, fortunately I get few calls these days.

Grayskies wrote:I don't answer calls from numbers my phone does not know, fortunately I get few calls these days.

I normally don’t but ignoring them wouldn’t get my point across.

Grayskies wrote:I don't answer calls from numbers my phone does not know, fortunately I get few calls these days.

Then how are you ever going to meet anyone new?

Holland&Holland wrote:

Grayskies wrote:I don't answer calls from numbers my phone does not know, fortunately I get few calls these days.

Then how are you ever going to meet anyone new?

There’s always pizza ranch and twisted sisters

Ghost wrote:

Holland&Holland wrote:

Grayskies wrote:I don't answer calls from numbers my phone does not know, fortunately I get few calls these days.

Then how are you ever going to meet anyone new?

There’s always pizza ranch and twisted sisters

Now you're talking my home town.

Speaking of donations, is a donation to the MN Gun Caucus a more efficient use of funds than a yearly membership? I don't care about membership cards, training discounts, member events or any of that stuff, I just want to support their efforts at the capital, and if donating maximizes every dollar then so be it.

I disagree with the NRA animosity. I understand the disappointment on some of the points, however, there is still not another organization of similar scale, reach and influence in the public sphere. So punishing them is punishing the movement. Expressing disagreement with recent choices by the organization is preferable to ignoring or avoiding communication. How else will your displeasure be registered and with no support you are just an angry voice, not an angry benefactor.

Tronster wrote:Speaking of donations, is a donation to the MN Gun Caucus a more efficient use of funds than a yearly membership? I don't care about membership cards, training discounts, member events or any of that stuff, I just want to support their efforts at the capital, and if donating maximizes every dollar then so be it.

Either is just as effective. A membership allows us to continue to see that number go up - which helps when legislators ask
b

I paid off my lifetime membership last year. That's enough money to them. Kinda ashamed to even say I'm a life member to a organization that won't fight for our rights anymore.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Do we really want to die on the Bumpstock Hill?

They are a fun gimmick for sure, but I can't see going to war over something as inconsequential as that. Whether that particular toy is legal isn't my litmus test for how hard anyone is working. Ive never seen a convincing argument made to keep them except for the classic MALON LABE hardcore 2A there should be no restrictions on anything, ever by anyone. Which is not at all realistic. I'd rather save the powder and the time for serious issues. That's my $.02, flame suit on for all the big" L" Libertarians who live in an idealized universe that most likely will never return. I, personally, am willing to trade bumpstocks for high cap magazines - I know, slippery slope, what's next, but within the context of existing laws, i haven't heard one convincing argument made for keeping bumpstocks legal.

Please convince me.

Bottom line is, I'd rather have the NRA than not have the NRA.

yukonjasper wrote:Do we really want to die on the Bumpstock Hill?

They are a fun gimmick for sure, but I can't see going to war over something as inconsequential as that. Whether that particular toy is legal isn't my litmus test for how hard anyone is working. Ive never seen a convincing argument made to keep them except for the classic MALON LABE hardcore 2A there should be no restrictions on anything, ever by anyone. Which is not at all realistic. I'd rather save the powder and the time for serious issues. That's my $.02, flame suit on for all the big" L" Libertarians who live in an idealized universe that most likely will never return. I, personally, am willing to trade bumpstocks for high cap magazines - I know, slippery slope, what's next, but within the context of existing laws, i haven't heard one convincing argument made for keeping bumpstocks legal.

Please convince me.

Bottom line is, I'd rather have the NRA than not have the NRA.

Because if we don't fight this, then we're agreeing that accessories are something that can be banned.
Because if we don't fight this, then we're saying that a bump stock ban is going to actually to do something to lower violent crime with a firearm.
Because if we don't fight this, we're saying that the ATF has the legal authority to regulate something that in statute they have no such authority to regulate.
Because if we don't fight this, the anti's will take those resources and move on to their next target.

I want them to have to fight tooth and nail for every single inch - on everything that's out there. The longer we hold the line on current law, the more we expand gun rights when we have the votes, the harder it is for them to get to the stuff they really want. Registration, AWB, magazine restrictions, gun owner licensing, and more.

Bryan

yukonjasper wrote:Do we really want to die on the Bumpstock Hill? ... I, personally, am willing to trade bumpstocks for high cap magazines

Thing is, they are not even proposing anything along the lines of "If we ban bump stocks we'll leave the magazines alone". They want bumps stocks AND full capacity mags banned, along with a crap ton of other stuff. This will never stop, they will never be satiated. I don't have skin in the bumpstock fight, but arbitrarily banning bumpstocks with no compensation and felony penalties is bogus and opens the door for broader bans down the road.

Tronster wrote:

yukonjasper wrote:Do we really want to die on the Bumpstock Hill? ... I, personally, am willing to trade bumpstocks for high cap magazines

Thing is, they are not even proposing anything along the lines of "If we ban bump stocks we'll leave the magazines alone". They want bumps stocks AND full capacity mags banned, along with a crap ton of other stuff. This will never stop, they will never be satiated. I don't have skin in the bumpstock fight, but arbitrarily banning bumpstocks with no compensation and felony penalties is bogus and opens the door for broader bans down the road.

Agree.