2424
Comments (66)
sorted by:
134
Aisle-is-closed 134 points ago +134 / -0

GOA is the organization that deserves our money. I used to pay the NRA every year. Nope. Not anymore. GOA has been committed to fighting for our rights in the courts every day. And they prove it with their actions. Please consider donating!

66
SpaceForceMilitia 66 points ago +66 / -0

Their actions are in line with the Constitution. The NRA has abandoned it. My money only goes fo GOA and has for a while. The NRA must pass on, as it is not an organization dedicated to 2A anymore.

59
deleted 59 points ago +60 / -1
41
ContraryCynic 41 points ago +42 / -1

There is something to be said for lightning rods...

17
TheOutsider 17 points ago +17 / -0

NRA is abandoning their purpose and comparing them to lightning rods is not a good analogy as lightning rods serve their purpose of protection from lightening while NRA isn't doing that much for Americans and their riifles as they like to gloat about. They give only lip service.

19
CertainlyNotEdward 19 points ago +19 / -0

Every time they call me I ask about red flag laws and why they support them.

They claim not to, but then they put out this bullshit:

“The National Rifle Association applauds the Trump administration’s Federal Commission on School Safety’s final report, issued today. The report includes a number of recommendations for which the NRA has been advocating for years, including reforming our mental health laws, strengthening school security, and addressing an increasingly violent culture. It also calls on the media to stop reporting the names and photos of mass murderers, which only encourages copycat behavior.

“Importantly, the commission expressly rejected age limitations on firearm purchases, which as the report explains in detail, have no real impact on crime.”

“Finally, we appreciate President Trump’s support for keeping firearms out of the hands of those who have been adjudicated by a court to be a danger to themselves or others in the form of state Extreme Risk Protection Orders — provided they include strong due process protections, require mental health treatmen, and include penalties against those who file frivolous charges to harass law-abiding citizens.”

Link here.

Excuse me? No. If you haven't committed a crime, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. No exceptions!

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
2
CertainlyNotEdward 2 points ago +2 / -0

Wait, what? What did GOA do?

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
5
AndrewLB 5 points ago +5 / -0

Mine goes to Judicial Watch.

4
win-o-matic 4 points ago +4 / -0

You have shed light on something important. For those who don't know, you can designate a cause at smile.amazon.com. After that, use your same Amazon login but always access smile.amazon.com instead of just www.amazon.com. IIRC every dollar you spend then results in a 1/2% donation to your designated recipient, at no added expense to you.

I really like the idea of having Jeff Bezos make a GOA contribution on my behalf, ha ha!

7
elliotle10 7 points ago +7 / -0

I am a GOA Patriot member. It’s a monthly recurring payment. Very easy to do.

7
LugNuts 7 points ago +8 / -1

I have to give to the NRA to join my shooting club. I don't like it, but that's the way it is.

5
The69thBrokage 5 points ago +5 / -0

Negotiating

Rights

Away

44
SBOJ_JOBS 44 points ago +44 / -0

Chuck has established a history of making threats against people in positions of power. This is a clear-cut case for Red Flag. If only the Gulags were ready!

40
Rob_Belmonte 40 points ago +40 / -0

It'd be amazing if Schumer lost his NYC concealed carry license.

Yes. Schumer both owns handguns and conceal carries in NYC.

But it's different for him. Ya' know.

He's a democrat.

1
JerryJerryJerry 1 point ago +1 / -0

Same with PRK's Feinstein [China]. Although she supposedly didn't renew for all the shit we gave her. I'm sure her guards followed suit... slash ess

36
NotProgCensored 36 points ago +36 / -0

And his armed guards. Crazy bastard might grab a guards gun and go all Tony Montana.

27
deleted 27 points ago +27 / -0
25
Cuzyoudbeinjail 25 points ago +25 / -0

This is perfect. If the judge dosent invoke red flag laws on Schumer, then this case can be used to in other cases as precedent.

4
FliesTheFlag 4 points ago +4 / -0

Sadly some cuck judge would say , muh position of power and it was political speak. You pleb lose your guns and get sent to the crazy house.

16
deleted 16 points ago +16 / -0
15
IncredibleMrE1 15 points ago +15 / -0

TOP. KEK.

Master-level trolling.

In all seriousness, though, kudos to them for actually doing something to protect our great justices. (cough get the hint, Billy Bagpipes?)

10
deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
6
splink 6 points ago +6 / -0

But only SOME politicians, can't have an exemption for those crazy conservatives, y'know.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
5
xBigCoffinHunter 5 points ago +5 / -0

Isn’t that the point of RF laws? You as a citizen consider someone dangerous and you report it. Let’s see how this goes

3
Darkheartisland 3 points ago +3 / -0

The point of red flag laws is to deny due process on the march torwards communism

5
DeathBattleFan123 5 points ago +5 / -0

Hey Cryin Chuck -- We're gonna put you in Epstein's cell. That's not a threat on your life because Epstein killed himself.

4
Soon2BTaxRefugee 4 points ago +4 / -0

NY doesn't have jurisdiction would be my guess. Happened in DC but if it was a Conservative...

10
blueeyephoto 10 points ago +10 / -0

He's still A resident of NY, shouldn't matter where he makes his threat, he's making threats

2
Deplora 2 points ago +2 / -0

If he owns any guns, then as a legal resident of NY, NY should have jurisdiction (but any jurisdiction in which he possesses guns, regardless of who actually owns them, would presumably also have jurisdiction).

3
RighteousHo 3 points ago +3 / -0

Lmao glad to be a member that's fucking classic.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
TheNotSoEvilEngineer 3 points ago +3 / -0

They need to use this legislation against every Governor and their protective details that votes in Red Flag laws. They pretty much all violate the statute.

(a) communicates, anonymously or otherwise, by telephone, by computer or any other electronic means, or by mail, or by transmitting or delivering any other form of communication, a threat to cause physical harm to, or unlawful harm to the property of, such person, or a member of such person’s same family or household as defined in subdivision one of section 530.11 of the criminal procedure law, and the actor knows or reasonably should know that such communication will cause such person to reasonably fear harm to such person’s physical safety or property, or to the physical safety or property of a member of such person’s same family or household; or 2. a substantial risk of physical harm to other persons as manifested by homicidal or other violent behavior by which others are placed in reasonable fear of serious physical harm.

3
BeefSupreme29 3 points ago +3 / -0

Amazing!

2
AndrewLB 2 points ago +2 / -0

I know a guy who got locked up for a year and had his guns taken away (one of which belonged to me) due to something he had said to his girlfriend during an ugly breakup. It's been 4 years and I still haven't gotten my property back. I'm willing to bet nothing will happen to Chucky.

2
Havokisme77 2 points ago +2 / -0

Explain this to a tard. Are they doing red flags against gun owners or against Charlie? Because I'm losing my patience with so called 'Pro-gun organizations'. If they're going against gun owners I might lose my shit in three directions.

2
not_a_shill 2 points ago +2 / -0

You mean these red flag laws can be abused for political gain?

1
JerryJerryJerry 1 point ago +1 / -0

I heard there were a couple other laws you could do that with, but the news said that was a debunked far-right conspiracy thingy.

2
Deplorable_in_PA 2 points ago +2 / -0

I've always heard a lot of gripes about the NRA and just chalked it up to "purity" drama queens but the latest bit about supporting red flag laws did it for me. Can the NRA name one state with red flag laws that gives a damn about "due process"? Even if there were true the state is still seizing legally acquired property without actually having to convict a person of a crime.

That's too bad. I give the NRA credit for many years of advocacy for gun owners. I heard Chris Cox once and the guy is the real deal. And Wayne deserves much credit for turning the org into one of the most feared and powerful lobbies in DC. But supporting red flag laws is just too much for me.

Good on GOA for calling out the blatant hypocrisy on the part of Cuomo and Schumer. Of course we know that gun laws are for little people, not democrat politicians.

2
EdisonHwy 2 points ago +2 / -0

Given the position and high office held by Senator Schumer, his hostile and threatening words are deeply concerning.

Are the police taking a strong look at Senator Schumer?

2
cajun_robear 2 points ago +2 / -0

I love being on the smart team.

2
joew 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'm dying - give him a taste of his own medicine. Have a swat team show up at 6 am to confiscate any firearms he owns.

2
lurker2020 2 points ago +2 / -0

I immediately thought this when Schumer threatened SCOTUS members. Love it.

1
Deplora 1 point ago +1 / -0

The application will certainly be denied, but hopefully not before the court considers it and crafts a formal decision. Schumer publicly apologized, said he did not intend to make a threat, and has no history of violence or significant mental illness (leftist political views don't count), so the court can easily and correctly decide that the issue is moot. But depending on the details included in such a decision, this action might prove to be a bit more than a publicity stunt.

1
K-Harbour 1 point ago +1 / -0

NRA — controlled 2A opposition.

1
Paul1149 1 point ago +1 / -0

Exquisite, indeed.

1
SaltGenerator 1 point ago +1 / -0

Good old Cuck "7 ways from Sunday" Shooma

1
OGTD1 1 point ago +1 / -0

Govna Northam needs one called in.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
NewUser101 1 point ago +1 / -0

Gorsuch and/or Kavanaugh could sue him under NY law per the article. He did not make these remarks on the Senate floor so he is not immune.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
-3
cicerogue -3 points ago +3 / -6

This is a bad move. Embracing this type of activism, even when it works in our favor, gives legitimacy to the laws that were created to be used against us in the first place.

8
dasaroth 8 points ago +8 / -0

While i see your view about giving legitimacy. i think they are taking a educated chance that the courts will refuse to give him a red flag order. Which will then give GOA a very compelling argument that the red flag order is not to disarm to prevent a person who may present a danger to others or themselves, but to deny a person of their 2A rights. For them do deny such an order to a politician or a person of influence shows that the order is not to protect but to disarm.

3
cicerogue 3 points ago +4 / -1

Fair enough, I guess we'll see how it plays out.