King, we've seen the advice that you offered to the NRA. It included giving up ground to the anti-gunners by giving up on large capacity magazines as you suggested here:
I'd feel better about 2nd protection if our side stopped shooting itself in the foot with the makes-no-difference between 10 and larger magazines, cross-messaging of the worst kind. The antis are saying if the difference is 6-8 seconds what's the problem of excluding the 10-plus?
It also included meekly rolling over when Obama and Co. were attempting to pass massive anti-gun legislation after Newtown in 2013. Here's a quote by King Brown from his post # 308159 on 1/8/13 where he lambasted the NRA and suggested that they should consider the massive gun control Obama was attempting to shove down our throats as he exploited a tragedy to infringe upon our Constitutional Rights:
"Your messages appear as from one who hasn't been involved directly in action of what it takes to beat back grabbers other than a NRA membership. (And that antagonizing NRA comment while the nation mourning was no service to our cause, as I said here at the time. Better that the NRA would consider what Obama proposing and it would respond in good time in the country's best interests etc.) Unwarranted inflaming of public opinion is a mistake, and in confrontations of this kind, it's the faux pas that can kill you. Some November dandies come to mind."
You have roundly and repeatedly criticized the NRA, especially about Wayne LaPierres comment that "the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun". You continued your NRA bashing even after that Wayne LaPierre statement was borne out in Canada when Mountie Kevin Vickers retrieved a gun and killed the Muslim Terrorist who was shooting up Parliament.
Thankfully, the NRA did not accept your insane advice to cede ground to the anti-gunners. That's kind of what happened during the passage of the GCA of 1968, and we have spent nearly 50 years attempting to claw back some of what we lost.
Stick to negotiating the clear-cutting of pulpwood King. We don't need or want any advice from an anti-gun Troll who is still in denial about the 2008 Heller and McDonald Supreme Court decisions:
Ed, historically the individual "right" to bear arms is relatively new. I believe John Ashcroft in 2002 became the first federal attorney-general to proclaim that individuals should be able to own guns. The Supreme Court in 2008 overturned all mainstream legal and historical scholarship by ruling that there is an individual right to own firearms although with some limits. Obama said it again last week.
I believe that during the previous 218 years the Second meant what it said: firearms shall be held by "the People"---a collective and not individual right---insofar they are in the service of "a well-regulated militia." Was an individual right even mentioned at the Constitutional Convention or in the House when it ratified the Amendment or when debated in state legislatures? I don't think so.
