2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumExactly where does the NRA draw a line?
Serious question: Just where does the NRA draw the line on personal ownership of arms? Do they think it's okay for people to walk around the mall with assault weapons? Is it okay to take them to sporting events, bars? Would it be fine if people could own their own little atomic bomb? After all, the government has them, and if they throw one my way, should I be able to throw one back at them? And what about people with mental illness? If you've ever been diagnosed with depression, does that disqualify you from gun ownership? Having a national registry of persons with mental illness would not have stopped the shooting at Sandy Hook as the shooter did not buy the gun.
Turbineguy
(37,364 posts)That's it.
It's not the principle, it's the money.
But then again, maybe it is the principle. The principle of creating terror.
SWTORFanatic
(385 posts)They don't give a fuck. Whatever helps sell more GUNS and GUN accessories.
Explosives, tanks, jets, etc? They aren't in that business.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Their books are open and its just not there.
SWTORFanatic
(385 posts)The NRA is a 501(c)(4) organization and indicated that the NRA's total income in 2004 was $205,402,491
The report, Blood Money: How the Gun Industry Bankrolls the NRA, reveals that since 2005 contributions from gun industry "corporate partners" to the NRA total between $14.7 million and $38.9 million. Total donations to the NRA from all "corporate partners"--both gun industry and non-gun industry--for the same time period total between $19.8 million and $52.6 million. The vast majority of funds--74 percent--contributed to the NRA from corporate partners come from members of the firearms industry: companies involved in the manufacture or sale of firearms or shooting-related products
Now the second paragraph is a report from early 2011. I don't know if the report is stating contributions per year, or contributions from 2005-2010, or what their exact timeframe is. I looked at the report and didn't find that information either. Regardless, based on the first paragraph their direct gun manufacture corporate donors are small compared to their other donors and membership dues - but if those gun manufacturing companies go out of business (and no one takes their place), the NRA loses those donors. The gun industry promotes more gun buying. Many of these new gun owners join the NRA. Their membership dues and donations also bankroll the NRA. Less new gun owners = less new NRA members.
So yes, they do profit from gun sales.
aandegoons
(473 posts)But not his goal here.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)SWTORFanatic
(385 posts)ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)What you should be looking at is the affiliated PACs. That is where the real money is
SWTORFanatic
(385 posts)Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)SWTORFanatic
(385 posts)as a mathematician, I say exactly what I mean.
Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)his students are screwed.
stultusporcos
(327 posts)It is just they way they are wired, profits over people.
Kablooie
(18,638 posts)It will take a whole room full of them slaughtered with an assault rifle.
And it would probably have to happen more than once to get them to reconsider their position.
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)I'm a gun owner, and I fucking DESPISE the NRA and virtually everything they stand for.
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)Tippy
(4,610 posts)The less likely they will be taken away...
Recursion
(56,582 posts)So, roughly, they think in general civilians should not be able to go out and buy machine guns.
Now, that may be a tactical lack of opposition (as in they know there's no way to overturn it in actual politics), but I don't have a window into their souls.
MurrayDelph
(5,300 posts)they draw concentric circles.
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)would start to think that some type of gun control is a good idea . . .
meow2u3
(24,768 posts)Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)They have too much invested (literally) in the mythology of the gun.