Yeah, that's why I used loose quotes.
Here: "[the nra has] tremendous influence [over SCOTUS]"
So we’ve gone from the court itself is a ‘clearly’ political tool (and I’m in fantasyland if I disagree) ... to the court is ‘in essence’ used as a political tool. Ok.
And then I’m not going to touch the completely ludicrous (not to mention unsubstantiated) notion that the NRA has influence over the court on gun cases.
So we’ve gone from the court itself is a ‘clearly’ political tool (and I’m in fantasyland if I disagree) ... to the court is ‘in essence’ used as a political tool. Ok.
And I’m not going to touch the completely ludicrous (not to mention unsubstantiated) notion that the NRA has influence over the court on gun cases.
The pro-Trump Supreme Court was instrumental in the Roe v Wade decision, thanks to the enormously successful lobbying efforts of the NRA and Russian interference.
I think I hit all the highlights
and the NRA wants you (if you are a child) dead.
fixed it for you
Ok tough guy. Pretend those statements have different meaning.
Looking forward to A.) small-government conservatives pushing for millions in training and arming teachers
And B.) the arguments for arming students when some nut teacher snaps.
Still puzzling over the logical tangle that suggests that banning certain firearms is part of the solution, but that the organizations and individuals who've fought tooth and nail to re-legalize and maintain the legal status of said firearms are NOT part of the problem.
But I don't think I'll ever be convinced that the object of the murder is to blame more than the murderer. Like I said - the double standards from the left on this are endless. It seems to be isolated to guns... not alcohol or trucks for example when similar tragedies occur
"I don't think I'll ever be convinced"
If I can find an instance of someone protecting themselves, their family, or their property with that weapon, would you then be willing concede that maybe the NRA is actually trying to protect that function of the weapon?