The NRA Just Released A New Commercial

Submitted by: fancylad 4 years ago in

Yep, you bet they go after Obama.
There are 65 comments:
Male 15,832
[quote]I still think all the `Molon Labe` loudmouths would run a mile.[/quote]
I`m too old to run.
0
Reply
Male 373
MeGrendel
`You seem to be that, if the government were to turn it`s own armed forces upon it`s citizens, there`d actually be much of that all volunteer force left? I can assure you, the majority of the armed forces would be on the side of the citizens.`

Kind of mangled the language there kid. Your raise a point, how realistic is it to say the governement will oppress you, if they have no force to oppress you with?
Assuming they did, I still think all the `Molon Labe` loudmouths would run a mile.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
@Bakcagain21 You really haven`t got the hang of this reading thing, have you?
0
Reply
Male 115
Soo dumb! of course the president`s family needs armed security they`re prime ransom targets! from an outside perspective all the people who don`t want guns banned seem like nutters!
0
Reply
Male 871
does that mean all NRA members will be asking their local politicians to ask for an increase in the education budget?
0
Reply
Male 3,445
@papaj:

He didn`t sign any executive orders: Source
0
Reply
Male 579
I love this ad for several reasons least of which is that it is the exact `appeal to emotion` you lefties pull for everyone of your damn causes. How`s it taste? Delish? I hope they make ten of these for every one video of a polar bear sitting on some ice floe all alone I`ve the misfortune of seeing. And just ask yourself what would you lefties have done if Bush had done something like Obama`s executive orders for a policy you didn`t like? You`d be stringing him up before the ink dried on his signature!
0
Reply
Male 390
@Palfas: The separation of church and state is nowhere in the Constitution.
0
Reply
Male 14,331
[quote]If some of you are strict constitutionalists, it would be nice to see you stick up for things like separation of church and state.[/quote]

I have it would be nice if you payed attention. It`s a stereotype and shows what a hypocrite you are.
0
Reply
Male 411
@McGovern "ROFL!! couldn`t be more wrong so much for liberals against sterotypes huh."

It`s not a stereotype, it`s an observation of who posts what in different threads. It was definitely a broad generalization of "all of you" though. If some of you are strict constitutionalists, it would be nice to see you stick up for things like separation of church and state.
0
Reply
Male 411
If there`s a specific threat against your kid, then you can hire a guard too.
0
Reply
Male 14,331
@Bakcagain21

You seem to think guns are unregulated they are.
0
Reply
Male 560
@OldOllie and by your logic the laws which regulated horse drawn carriages should be sufficient for modern day cars....
0
Reply
Male 14,331

0
Reply
Male 14,331
[quote]I`m pretty sure that all of you claiming the Constitution as your reason for insisting on the "right" to own military grade rifles and ammunition are the same people who would vote to include the 10 Commandments in court houses, prayer in school, the forced teaching of Christian-based Creationism as a science class, abstinence-only sex ed and the prevention of any mosques being built here, ever. And Sharia Law. Derp. Derp. Derp. [/quote]

ROFL!! couldn`t be more wrong so much for liberals against sterotypes huh.
0
Reply
Male 334
sigh, idiots will be idiots..

people at ther top need to prot4ct there assets, even if they are human beings. And you dont get much higher or controversial as being the president of the united states.
Why? well, just about every group with an axe to grind will try to get to the states by abducting or killing the kids of the president.. that would be good PR. As in, the usa cant even keep their kids safe even if they know they are in harms way.

do you want to call everyone with a gun a potential terrorist NRA? and if so, shouldnt there be less of them then?
Or would you like to disagree that high trees catch more wind
0
Reply
Male 1,421
Doesn`t the POTUS need armed protection because these gun nuts would like to shoot him?
0
Reply
Male 1,313
Damn you and your word filter, Fancy.. damn you indeed.
0
Reply
Male 1,313
Oh libtards and refudgetardlicans.. why can`t you all just get along
0
Reply
Male 40,414
[quote]And by your logic the 1st amendment should only apply to hand-powered printing presses and not to radio, TV, cable, satellites, or the Internet, all of which our Founding Fathers could have NEVER imagined.[/quote]
OUTSTANDING point @OldOllie! I expect absolute silence in reply...
0
Reply
Male 3,445
"Then maybe you can explain why all the dumb$#!+ antigun liberal f***tards aren`t flinging their turds at Obama like they did at Wayne Lapierre for saying THE EXACT SAME THING!"

Because that was the NRA`s only suggestion.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
NRA for gun rights are like Biden in the `08 campaign. Every time they run their mouths, they make their side look stupid.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]I`m pretty sure that all of you claiming the Constitution as your reason for insisting on the "right" to own military grade rifles and ammunition[/quote]
When the 2nd amendment was written, the guns owned by the people weren`t military grade, they were BETTER. The standard issue firearm for the army was a musket, while the typical citizen-farmer owned a long rifle which has twice the range, twice knock-down power, twice the rate of fire, and more than twice the accuracy. That meant that a group of farmers could easily take out twice their number of soldiers in an open field without suffering a single casualty.

And by your logic the 1st amendment should only apply to hand-powered printing presses and not to radio, TV, cable, satellites, or the Internet, all of which our Founding Fathers could have NEVER imagined.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]The dumbest part about this ad is that Obama DID propose armed guards in school as part of his gun control package today. [/quote]
Then maybe you can explain why all the dumb$#!+ antigun liberal f***tards aren`t flinging their turds at Obama like they did at Wayne Lapierre for saying THE EXACT SAME THING!
0
Reply
Male 4,864
That is the funniest Onion parody ad to date.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
The dumbest part about this ad is that Obama DID propose armed guards in school as part of his gun control package today.

Link
0
Reply
Male 1,048
Jesus christ. Everybody is so divided. Humans are violent as f*ck
0
Reply
Male 8,447
AltairWolfe-"I don`t think the founders envisioned the raw destructive power"

And yet, when they wrote it into the constitution, they had in mind the most powerful and deadly hand-held weapon of the time.

dirtysteve00-"Like they would raise a weapon against the armed forces if the time came."

You seem to be that, if the government were to turn it`s own armed forces upon it`s citizens, there`d actually be much of that all volunteer force left? I can assure you, the majority of the armed forces would be on the side of the citizens.
0
Reply
Male 133
"I`m pretty sure that all of you claiming the Constitution as your reason for insisting on the "right" to own military grade rifles and ammunition are the same people who would vote to include the 10 Commandments in court houses, prayer in school, the forced teaching of Christian-based Creationism as a science class, abstinence-only sex ed and the prevention of any mosques being built here,"

You clearly know nothing about weapons. An average citizen MAY NOT own a military grade weapon. Only a specially licensed, federally licensed citizen may own a military grade weapon. But listening to the media blow a bunch of smoke is easier than thinking and researching facts. Oh, and all the school stuff, religion should not be forced in public schools, just private. The rest of the kids can get it on Sunday. And the ten commandments in the courtroom? Not really an argument available as our laws are based on the ten commandments, but why remind the criminals right? A
0
Reply
Male 133
They call Obam an elitist hypocrite. That is a true statement. He proves it everyday. But like my mamma said "that`s like the pot calling the kettle black". I left the NRA a long time ago after I figured out all they want is more money from you, and only really support the extreme gun owners, not the average everyday gun owner. You know, the one who doesn`t need a large magazine to hit his target, or a semi automatic rifle for hunting. I own none of these, but taking away my right to have one kinda irks me. Oh, and I prefer revolvers too semi auto pistols. You don`t have to remember to pick up your brass if you are in a hurry.
0
Reply
Male 2,436
[quote]Just a desperate organization struggling to keep its relevance in an ever changing cultural climate.[/quote]

...ever changing cultural climate

...ever changing cultural climate

Never give up your Second Amendment rights!
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote] vote to include the 10 Commandments in court houses, prayer in school, the forced teaching of Christian-based Creationism as a science class, abstinence-only sex ed and the prevention of any mosques being built here, ever[/quote]

Nope, sorry don`t fit that description.
0
Reply
Male 373
I love all the pussies on the internet talking about `defending against tyranny`
Like they would raise a weapon against the armed forces if the time came.
0
Reply
Male 946
JoexBro summed it up nicely. It`s not about school shootings or hunting or any of that crap. It is solely about protecting ourselves against a tyrannical gov`t.
Today, Obama took a HUGE step towards tyranny and all you libutards just don`t see it.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
Moronic, insulting, and quite frankly, juvenile logic in this ad.
0
Reply
Male 31
The N.R.A is to gun rights what P.E.T.A. is for animal rights, both starting with good intentions, but always looking like a bunch of douche bags
0
Reply
Male 20
@JoexBro - Should fully automatic M-16 rifles be allowed in the general public`s hands? How about an M-249 SAW?

You can debate this, obviously, but I don`t think the founders envisioned the raw destructive power that might one day be easily available to ordinary citizens. While the 2nd amendment guarantees our right to bear arms, I doubt it`s meant to cover ANY arms you can manage. Where we draw that line can surely be argued and challenged, but I doubt many ordinary individuals don`t want a line at all.
0
Reply
Male 4,431
I`m pretty sure that all of you claiming the Constitution as your reason for insisting on the "right" to own military grade rifles and ammunition are the same people who would vote to include the 10 Commandments in court houses, prayer in school, the forced teaching of Christian-based Creationism as a science class, abstinence-only sex ed and the prevention of any mosques being built here, ever. And Sharia Law. Derp. Derp. Derp.

So forgive me if your Second Amendment argument holds no water with me.
0
Reply
Male 20
@MeGrendel - No way in hell am saying we shouldn`t worry about the safety of our kids. My school district keeps every door locked with only one electronically locked point of entry with cameras to see who is trying to get in. Select teachers are trained in crisis operations and police officers whenever possible are either on premise or patrolling. There ARE things we can do.

But to equate a high profile target, under constant threat by highly motivated and possibly even trained attackers, as the same as the remote possibility that a mentally unstable dickweed tries to shoot his way through the front door -- is retarded.
0
Reply
Male 8,447
AltairWolfe-"When my kids go to school... there is NOBODY that specifically wants them dead, so yeah"

Yeah, we shouldn`t be worried about our kids...since they are not `high-priority targets` NOBODY has ever shot up a school.

Wait......
0
Reply
Male 390
The NRA is a bunch of degenerate ignorant cynical challenged kids trapped in adult bodies.
0
Reply
Male 557
Here, I`ll end the whole debate on gun control right now. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Get real on societal impact on people who lose it and go kill people with guns. Form a well regulated militia controlled by the people in the state and not the federal government. Government must give technologies that it posess`s to these free states so that they may defend themselves against a tyrannical or oppressive government. The End (No political affiliation or agenda, just going by the bill if rights)
0
Reply
Male 4,431
The guy who destroyed 20 elementary school aged children is who brought kids into it.
0
Reply
Male 14,331



Sums up the strategy.
0
Reply
Male 40,414
Hey, Obama`s the one hiding behind a "human shield" of children.

Like it or not, it`s the gun-grabbers who`ve brought children into the issue, to play on your emotions, get it? They have no logic, emotional appeal is ALL they have!
0
Reply
Male 4,431
Okay, I`m willing to debate gun stuff until the cows come home, but this is just effing stupid. The safety of the president`s family (regardless of who the president is) is a national security issue precisely because if threatening forces thought they could leverage a threat against the president`s family to gain leverage against the president and national security, they would.

Can the same be said for your kids or mine? No. If the NRA wants to make good points in the gun control argument, fine. But this is just dumbass broken BS.
0
Reply
Male 9,543
Come on guys, let`s drop the vitriol.

1. Obama`s kids are under a constant and very real threat. Would anybody deny that? Most kids aren`t.

2. Security guards DON`T always fix the problem. They certainly didn`t in Colombine right?

3. There is a lot more than a cop with a gun walking around Obama`s kids` school. There is a massive level of security that nobody imagines is even remotely feasible for every school.

4. Even if kids are safe at school that doesn`t do anything about their safety at a mall or movie theater until we make it harder for crazy people to get weapons.

I`m not saying I agree with the new position or gun control period. However this commercial is dumb.
0
Reply
Male 20
How effin stupid is this argument I keep hearing for the pro-gun movement? Do we REALLY expect the leader of most powerful country in human history to pretend he doesn`t have a huge target painted on his, and his family`s back for all the crazies and foreign enemies that want him dead?

When my kids go to school... there is NOBODY that specifically wants them dead, so yeah, I`m not to worried about having armed security guards around all the time. But you can bet I don`t want my President worrying about how many people might want to hurt HIS children, instead of focusing on his job. And that goes for WHOEVER is in office.

Just a desperate organization struggling to keep its relevance in an ever changing cultural climate. Their money I guess.
0
Reply
Male 2,332
@Darkmagician: Not sure what you`re implying.
0
Reply
Male 40,414
It`s a fact, so IAB-libtards will hate it!

@sparki: Yes, but Obama wants to take away the freedom of choice for "average" Americans, by force of law.
Constitution? Feh! Who needs it!
0
Reply
Male 1,625
@Reignblazer. I`m willing to bet a rival gang member is more of a target than the Obama children. A gang leader is more of a target, in the US, than POTUS.

More important? No. Higher profile target? Yes.
0
Reply
Male 762
I am sure the president would love to lead a country that he doesn`t fear harbors people who want to kill his children.
0
Reply
Male 762
Yeah! Where is my personal secret service. And my fleet of jets and helicopters... and gigantic white house.... and... Wait... maybe we shouldn`t compare the president`s life to our own lives. It just might be a little different and necessitate some perks.
0
Reply
Male 329
Ofcourse this fails to land truthfully since one of the executive actions Obama is pushing that does not require congressional approval is: to "Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper
training for active shooter situations."
and another is "Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers."

Wasn`t there a video yesterday about an armed SRO, seems he wants that? Kind of untruthful of the NRA to say he`s against armed guards at schools..
0
Reply
Male 8,447
Reignblazer-"More important? No. More likely a target? Yes."

So? That`s just odds. Why should the peons` children be refused protection just because it`s `less likely`?

If armed guards make his children safer, he can not claim that armed guards in every school would make them `less safe`.
0
Reply
Male 1,196
I agree with Gerry on this one. I am also pro gun ownership but this ad is pretty dumb.
0
Reply
Male 2,332
"ARE Obama`s kids more important than mine?"

More important? No. More likely a target? Yes.
0
Reply
Male 14,331
Do as I say not as I do. If guns are the problem why are the politicians surrounded by "military style assault weapons?"
0
Reply
Female 1,539
@Gerry1of1 Agreed.
0
Reply
Male 8,447
ARE Obama`s kids more important than mine?

If he is so against armed guards at school, he needs to set an example and lead the way.

Until he does, he`s spouting bull.
0
Reply
Male 2,332
Hah!

While this commercial is completely retarded, the gun-toting cat has long since come out of the kevlar bag.
0
Reply
Male 2,670
They is ah tryin` to take our GUNZ! Derp!
0
Reply
Male 39,619

I am on the record as being pro-gun ownership.
But that is one of the dumbest ads ever.
0
Reply
Male 14,331
Truth hurts.
0
Reply
Male 20,830
Link: The NRA Just Released A New Commercial [Rate Link] - Yep, you bet they go after Obama.
0
Reply