Page 1 of 1

Here we go with the "Brady Braintrust"??once again

Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:43 pm
by 5thGenTexan
http://news.msn.com/us/us-gun-website-s ... slayings-3

The Brady Center said that the case does not infringe on the Second Amendment right to bear arms, noting that 74 percent of National Rifle Association members believe that no guns should be sold without a criminal background check. A representative for the NRA was not immediately available for comment.
I don't know what 74% of NRA members they came up with to get that result. I can't think of even one that feels that way.

Re: Here we go with the "Brady Braintrust"??once again

Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:49 pm
by Gameover
Guess I'm part of the 26% :patriot:

Re: Here we go with the "Brady Braintrust"??once again

Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:55 pm
by JustMe
you would think that if 74% believed it, then that means that 3 out of 4 of us were asked---did you get your call? I know I didn't!!

Re: Here we go with the "Brady Braintrust"??once again

Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:07 pm
by baldeagle
Considering that both msnbc and the brady bunch make up stuff routinely, anything is possible.

Re: Here we go with the "Brady Braintrust"??once again

Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:10 pm
by mr surveyor
and, 62% of private firearms sellers would sell a gun to someone that admitted they wouldn't pass a background check?

Re: Here we go with the "Brady Braintrust"??once again

Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:32 pm
by MikeStone
67% of statistics are made up on the spot...

Re: Here we go with the "Brady Braintrust"??once again

Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:01 pm
by A-R
What makes these sales illegal? I know in some states, private party sales are illegal. And of course knowingly selling to a buyer who is prohibited from possessing a firearm is illegal, but the article is so vague (probably purposely so) it makes it sound like any gun transaction started via an Internet site is illegal, which is untrue.

Re: Here we go with the "Brady Braintrust"??once again

Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:43 pm
by 5thGenTexan
It's illegal because the Brady Bunch wants to imply it was. There is very little they spew that is true. in fact mathmaticians would rfer to their truths as a rounding error. The guy was pure and simple a nut case obsessed with a gal that dumped him, yet he wasn't crazy as he waited to return to Chicago until they repealed the death penalty.

Re: Here we go with the "Brady Braintrust"??once again

Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:04 am
by baldeagle
Has anyone looked at the website they're suing? It's like a craigslist for guns. They don't receive any money for advertising or commissions for the sales. I don't see how in the world they could hold that site responsible for the sale of weaponry between two private parties. Their disclaimer says it all:
Always comply with local, state, federal, and international law. ARMSLIST does not become involved in transactions between parties. Review our privacy policy and terms of use for more information. Report Illegal Firearms Activity to 1-800-ATF-GUNS.

Re: Here we go with the "Brady Braintrust"??once again

Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:46 am
by 5thGenTexan
Same as them suing an ammo mfg or firearms mfg. Pure and simple harrassment to force some poor guy to spend money he shouldn't have to and if they are successful bankrupt them one by one. Until noone wants to chance facilitating sales. If you can't get a law passed then harrass them out of existance. Legal terrorism in the courts. :mad5

Re: Here we go with the "Brady Braintrust"??once again

Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:26 am
by CoffeeNut
This is about as dumb as those Aussie radio hosts being fired because some Brit nurse decided to hang herself after they "pranked" her. I'm not sure how they were responsible for that and I'm not sure how the site in question is responsible for anything other than sales.