ajjar, I have already indicated what was not factual in your post, but since you are too agenda driven to see it, I will repeat it for you. You said that
the NRA SUPPORTED the NFA of 1934 and the GCA of 1968. That is factually untrue. It is also the exact same propaganda that is used by anti-gunners in their constant attempts to denigrate the pro-2nd Amendment efforts of the NRA over the last 50 years, since they evolved into a Gun Rights Organization due to the demands of the vast majority of their membership.
You also used the exact same cherry-picked 1934 quote from NRA President Karl Frederick that anti-gunners frequently quote. If you actually read that quote, all he said was that he seldom carried a firearm, and that the practice should be restricted and licensed. That is exactly what we have today under our Concealed Carry laws... restriction and licensing. Nowhere in your cherry-picked quote did Karl Frederick, or the NRA, say that they supported the NFA of 1934. Frederick, and a few others were merely content that it did not appear to interfere with sportsmen in general. But by the late 1950's, it became obvious that many politicians, mostly Democrats, were constantly pressing for further infringements upon the 2nd Amendment. This is when members of the NRA realized that the goal of anti-gunners was a slow attrition of all guns and gun rights.
That push continues even today, and it is aided and abetted by Fudd's and back-stabbers like you. We are not friends, and we are not likely to ever become friends with your current attitudes toward classes of perfectly legal firearms. I will not be inviting you to go shooting with me thinking that I will ever change your thinking. The so-called "Big Tent" theory of embracing and inviting anti-gunners and those who support anti-gun politicians has not worked at all. Trojan Horses like you are best left outside the gates and exposed for what they are.
I'm hoping that the illiterate mental midget dla (sic) will finally show us where I ever said that we should all be able to own nukes. And what exactly is a phycosis anyway?
Ajjar....discussing anything with people that have a clinical phycosis is futile.
Oh...Keith believes we should all be able to own nukes, because the government does...
Since none of us have the tens of billions of dollars necessary to build a nuclear weapon, a dishonest and idiotic point made by someone who frequently demonstrates his stupidity is meaningless. FYI ajjar, fully automatic weapons are still perfectly legal to own under the NFA of 1934 and the GCA of 1968, and wealthy private citizens can and do own military fighter airplanes and jets. Hell, Donald Trump could conceivably load his own Boeing 757 with fuel and crash it into a skyscraper like the Muslim terrorists armed with box-cutters did. And a dramatic proliferation of semi-automatic rifles and handguns has led to, ta-da, a reduction in murders in the U.S. compared to 50 years ago.
Making foolish points has not changed the fact that anti-gunners don't like any guns. And Fudd's who are willing to continue making sacrifices and concessions that do not affect them personally are paving the road to a day when our kids and grandchildren cannot own and shoot firearms. I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear that you voted for Hillary Clinton, who felt we should follow Australia's example of gun control. Here's what that looks like:
[img:center]
https://i2.wp.com/hardnoxandfriends.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/NSW-no-reason_poster.jpg?w=624[/img]
