Can a US president deem the NRA to be a terrorism organization?

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,034
2,613
136
Currently the black lives matter group is calling the NRA a terrorist organization. The governor of connecticut also said the same just 3 days ago .

I remember a little while back having a conversation with a friend about this. It depends on very much on what you call terrorism was somewhat the conclusion we reached. Whilst terrorism refers to the use of violence for various gains (mostly inciting fear, silencing opponents, and other nefarious political and economic purposes), continually supporting those that commit such acts generally seems to be considered terrorism a well. Refer to say various countries that support terrorists though are not directly doing the terrorism themselves. The US still may designate such groups as terrorists simply for more or less continuing to support other more active groups.

It seems to me that time and time again, the NRA seems to fight for the ability for homegrown terrorists to continue to terrorize. Not to mention their rather violent themes, statements, and propaganda they utilize to whip up their base and persistent support for right wing groups. In fact, in many ways the NRA seems to benefit from these shootings as membership spikes and gun sales as well in the aftermath of them.

What if a sitting president was to simply label the NRA and its leadership as homegrown terrorists? Would that be too far? Is that something even feasible? Or is the NRA simply a well oiled propaganda and legal machine to sell guns but not really much more than that.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,574
7,637
136
What if a sitting president was to simply label the NRA and its leadership as homegrown terrorists?

So you want to declare Civil War. Did I hear you correctly? Step back and think what the NRA is, the pervasiveness of the ideology, the CORE issue of "guns stop guns", and that half the country is vulnerable to feeling attacked by such a notion of yours.

As for your question. I assume that's a task for the Department of Justice? So I'm assuming there's some legal requirements involved.
 

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,034
2,613
136
So you want to declare Civil War. Did I hear you correctly? Step back and think what the NRA is, the pervasiveness of the ideology, the CORE issue of "guns stop guns", and that half the country is vulnerable to feeling attacked by such a notion of yours.

As for your question. I assume that's a task for the Department of Justice? So I'm assuming there's some legal requirements involved.
Everything you just said could be said about the KKK. it was extremely pervasive in US culture and ideology and many supported them; for many it was a way of life and something very much part of fabric of society for many groups. Still at some point someone decided that it was actually terrorism and things changed. They started being prosecuted (the leadership particularly), funding sources were attacked, etc and now the KKK is a shell of itself.

The idea that some people will be upset isn't a reason to not do something. Even more so, its one thing if the leadership of an organization are labeled as closet terrorists. It doesn't mean the actual random members who pay dues are. Rather it'd be identifying that if the organization is to continue to exist it may need new leadership.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,128
5,657
126
I would not call it a terrorist organization, but it certainly has become a Conspiracy Nuthouse a'la Infowars and the like. It certainly no longer deserves the respect it is given.
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,723
2,064
136
Winner, winner, chicken dinner.
Did you like the relevant parts?

"The "We the People" team noted that "The White House plays no role in designating domestic terror organizations," nor does the U.S. government "generate a list of domestic terror organizations.
"[T]herefore," the response read, "we are not able to address the formal request of your petition."

The White House then went further: Acknowledging that it was a "difficult time" for the country -- and that the debate remains a "charged" one -- the statement additionally prompted petition signers to consider President Obama's words calling for compassion towards the movement."
 

urvile

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2017
1,575
474
96
Did you like the relevant parts?

"The "We the People" team noted that "The White House plays no role in designating domestic terror organizations," nor does the U.S. government "generate a list of domestic terror organizations.
"[T]herefore," the response read, "we are not able to address the formal request of your petition."

The White House then went further: Acknowledging that it was a "difficult time" for the country -- and that the debate remains a "charged" one -- the statement additionally prompted petition signers to consider President Obama's words calling for compassion towards the movement."

I actually don't give a shit. I just enjoy poking you with a stick (No. Not in that way you sick fuck.). Although I have been trying to cut back lately.....
 

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,034
2,613
136
Did you like the relevant parts?

"The "We the People" team noted that "The White House plays no role in designating domestic terror organizations," nor does the U.S. government "generate a list of domestic terror organizations.
"[T]herefore," the response read, "we are not able to address the formal request of your petition."

The White House then went further: Acknowledging that it was a "difficult time" for the country -- and that the debate remains a "charged" one -- the statement additionally prompted petition signers to consider President Obama's words calling for compassion towards the movement."
I find it odd to hear the US Government does not have a list of domestic terror organizations. Are they saying there are none? Or they simply don't want people to know who they are.
 

Meghan54

Lifer
Oct 18, 2009
11,573
5,096
136
What actions have they ever committed that would place them in the "Terrorist" folder?

On the other hand...........

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-...n-to-label-black-lives-matter-a-terror-group/


ROFL!!!! You're trying to represent a petition created, and which only garnered 906 signatures after it was posted in July, 2016 (yes, this is 2 years old) as an official U.S. govt. position?

Seriously?

And, yes, both DHS and the FBI maintain terrorist/terror watch lists of persons and organizations on every side of the spectrum. To think otherwise is idiocy, which sorta fits in with the diarrhea you spew from your mouth.
 

urvile

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2017
1,575
474
96
Did you like the relevant parts?

"The "We the People" team noted that "The White House plays no role in designating domestic terror organizations," nor does the U.S. government "generate a list of domestic terror organizations.
"[T]herefore," the response read, "we are not able to address the formal request of your petition."

The White House then went further: Acknowledging that it was a "difficult time" for the country -- and that the debate remains a "charged" one -- the statement additionally prompted petition signers to consider President Obama's words calling for compassion towards the movement."

Look tajy it's OK to agree with bannon one of trumps former top political advisors and this statement that he made:

"Bannon told the crowd, “Let them call you racists. Let them call you xenophobes. Let them call you nativists,” The Post reported. “Wear it as a badge of honor. Because every day, we get stronger and they get weaker.”

It's also OK to think that hitler didn't go far enough when it came to the jews. It's fine. First amendment bro. and if the liberals try and tell you otherwise well you have assault rifles and stuff. You will show those liberals. Won't you tajbot.
 

Alpha One Seven

Golden Member
Sep 11, 2017
1,098
124
66
Currently the black lives matter group is calling the NRA a terrorist organization. The governor of connecticut also said the same just 3 days ago .

I remember a little while back having a conversation with a friend about this. It depends on very much on what you call terrorism was somewhat the conclusion we reached. Whilst terrorism refers to the use of violence for various gains (mostly inciting fear, silencing opponents, and other nefarious political and economic purposes), continually supporting those that commit such acts generally seems to be considered terrorism a well. Refer to say various countries that support terrorists though are not directly doing the terrorism themselves. The US still may designate such groups as terrorists simply for more or less continuing to support other more active groups.

It seems to me that time and time again, the NRA seems to fight for the ability for homegrown terrorists to continue to terrorize. Not to mention their rather violent themes, statements, and propaganda they utilize to whip up their base and persistent support for right wing groups. In fact, in many ways the NRA seems to benefit from these shootings as membership spikes and gun sales as well in the aftermath of them.

What if a sitting president was to simply label the NRA and its leadership as homegrown terrorists? Would that be too far? Is that something even feasible? Or is the NRA simply a well oiled propaganda and legal machine to sell guns but not really much more than that.
Only if they engage in terrorism, then it's not the President that declares it, it's law enforcement.
Also, the NRA does not sell guns, they sell memberships and advocate the rights of gun owners as a group.
 

Alpha One Seven

Golden Member
Sep 11, 2017
1,098
124
66
Everything you just said could be said about the KKK. it was extremely pervasive in US culture and ideology and many supported them; for many it was a way of life and something very much part of fabric of society for many groups. Still at some point someone decided that it was actually terrorism and things changed. They started being prosecuted (the leadership particularly), funding sources were attacked, etc and now the KKK is a shell of itself.

The idea that some people will be upset isn't a reason to not do something. Even more so, its one thing if the leadership of an organization are labeled as closet terrorists. It doesn't mean the actual random members who pay dues are. Rather it'd be identifying that if the organization is to continue to exist it may need new leadership.
The KKK as a group is not a terrorist. Any members that engage in any illegal activity are punishable under the law. Any member that never commits any crime is not punishable just for being an idiot and joining that group. Stupidity is still legal, just look around you. Think the jails are full now, try jailing every stupid person in the US.
 
Reactions: Atreus21 and IJTSSG

urvile

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2017
1,575
474
96
The KKK as a group is not a terrorist. Any members that engage in any illegal activity are punishable under the law. Any member that never commits any crime is not punishable just for being an idiot and joining that group. Stupidity is still legal, just look around you. Think the jails are full now, try jailing every stupid person in the US.

Except it has nothing to do with stupidity and everything to do with organised white supremacy. Look no further than former trump senior advisor steve bannon.

"Bannon told the crowd, “Let them call you racists. Let them call you xenophobes. Let them call you nativists,” The Post reported. “Wear it as a badge of honor. Because every day, we get stronger and they get weaker.”

Good attempt at downplaying the far right extremism associated with donald trump though.

EDIT: I cannot wait for bannon to finally make his true feelings about the jews known. I think if he keeps speaking at far right conferences he will be quoted as saying hitler didn't go far enough soon.
 
Last edited:

Alpha One Seven

Golden Member
Sep 11, 2017
1,098
124
66
Except it has nothing to do with stupidity and everything to do with organised white supremacy. Look no further than former trump senior advisor steve bannon.

"Bannon told the crowd, “Let them call you racists. Let them call you xenophobes. Let them call you nativists,” The Post reported. “Wear it as a badge of honor. Because every day, we get stronger and they get weaker.”

Good attempt at downplaying the far right extremism associated with donald trump though.
One idiot does not represent anyone but their self.
 

OWR88

Senior member
Oct 27, 2013
231
73
101
NRA fosters mental cases. Only the vulnerable and low IQ believe the NRA doctrine. Unfortunately our education system has created tons of low IQ Americans. I can't research to buy a gun without getting hammered with Hilary coming to get your gun ads by NRA. Fucking nutjobs and ammosexuals.
 

urvile

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2017
1,575
474
96

^^^^^LOL. Did I break you? I was merely curious as to what your cognitive dissonance looks like.

Just to reiterate. One of trumps top advisors has proven himself to be a proud racist. Oh well.
 

urvile

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2017
1,575
474
96
NRA fosters mental cases. Only the vulnerable and low IQ believe the NRA doctrine. Unfortunately our education system has created tons of low IQ Americans. I can't research to buy a gun without getting hammered with Hilary coming to get your gun ads by NRA. Fucking nutjobs and ammosexuals.

I am fairly sure low IQ is genetic (you know what I am saying right? Camps....yeah you know what I am saying) and has nothing to do with a propensity to own firearms. I could be wrong though.
 

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
We have a culture that glorifies guns and promotes gun violence as the answer in movies, television, music videos, video games but it's all the NRA's fault who should be labeled a terrorist organization while the greatest promoters of gun violence get to hide behind the first amendment,

because we know children and adults alike can separate facts from fiction unless it's Russians using the same media, they can sway elections so they must be stopped.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...ent-media-and-aggressive-behavior-in-children

Violent Media and Aggressive Behavior in Children
Does watching violence on TV, in movies, or video games promote aggression?
Posted Jan 08, 2018

With recent worry about mass shootings and gun violence in the United States, one of the questions that always comes up is whether violent media promotes violent or aggressive behavior. This is something that is especially important to think about for parents, as violent content is common on television and in movies, on the internet, and in some of the most popular children’s video games.

Although the issue is often presented as controversial in the media, we have pretty good evidence that exposure to violent media does make children more aggressive. And we’ve known it for decades. In one of the most well-known studies on this topic (published all the way back in the 1960s), researchers showed preschoolers a video of an adult playing with an inflatable doll. In the video, the children watched as the adult sat on the doll, punched it in the nose, hit the doll on the head with a mallet, and kicked it repeatedly. After watching the video, the children were brought into a playroom with the same doll and lots of other toys. As predicted, the kids who watched the aggressive video imitated what they saw—they beat the doll with a mallet, and they punched and kicked it. What was most surprising was that the children found new and creative ways to beat up the doll, and they played more aggressively with the other toys in the room as well. In other words, children didn’t just imitate the aggressive behaviors they saw; seeing aggressive behaviors caused these kids to play more aggressively in general (Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1963).

Very recent research suggests that these effects can become particularly problematic when guns are involved. Researchers from Ohio State University brought pairs of 8- to 12-year-old children into a lab and showed them a 20-minute version of a popular PG-rated movie—either the Rocketeer (1991) or National Treasure (2004). In the edited movie, the children either saw that actual movie footage, which contained characters using guns, or they watched a version where the guns were edited out. They were then presented with a large room that contained various toys including Legos, nerf guns, and games. Not surprisingly, the children who watched the movie with the guns played more aggressively than children who watched the movie with the guns edited out, consistent with previous research.


Source: jarmoluk/Pixabay
But that wasn’t all; the study had a bit of a twist. The playroom also contained a closed cabinet, where in one of the drawers was a real 0.38-caliber handgun. The gun was not loaded, and it was modified so that it couldn’t fire bullets. It was also modified so that it kept track of the number of times the trigger was pulled hard enough that the gun would have gone off. The children weren’t told that there was a gun in the room, the researchers were simply interested in whether the children would find the gun on their own, and if they did, what they’d do with it.

About 83 percent of the kids in the study found the gun, and most of them played with it. Of the kids who found it, 27 percent immediately gave it to the experimenter and the experimenter took it out of the room. Of the remaining 58 percent of kids who found the gun, 42 percent played with it in various ways. Importantly, almost none of the kids who watched the movie clip without guns ever pulled the trigger. The kids who watched the movie that contained gun footage were more likely to pull the trigger of the real gun; on average, they pulled it about 2 to 3 times, and spent 4 to 5 times longer holding it when compared to kids who watched the movie with no gun footage. What’s scarier is that some of these kids pulled the trigger more than a few times; in fact, they pulled it quite a lot. Some pulled the trigger over 20 times; one child pointed the gun out the window at people walking down the street; and another child pressed the gun to another child’s temple and pulled the trigger (Dillon, & Bushman, 2017).

This research suggests that violent media can cause aggressive behavior in children, and that this behavior can be incredibly problematic if the violent media includes guns. Indeed, children are incredibly curious about guns, and they can have difficulty understanding the difference between real and toy guns (Benjamin, Kepes, & Bushman, 2017). In fact, there is research suggesting that guns don’t need to be featured in the media to cause aggression; the mere presence of a gun is enough to elicit aggressive behavior. For example, having a gun sitting on a table makes people behave more aggressively (Berkowitz & LePage, 1967), and recent work shows that having a gun in the car makes people (even non-gun owners) more aggressive drivers (Bushman, Kerwin, Whitlock, & Weisenberger, 2017). These effects even exist in children, whether or not the gun is real or is just a toy (Benjamin Kepes, & Bushman, 2017).

So can viewing violent media cause more aggression in children? The answer based on this research is a very clear yes. And it’s worth pointing out that the videos children saw in the studies I described were pretty mild; they either saw a homemade video of someone playing roughly with a doll, or 20-minute clips of movies that were rated PG. The violence in these videos pales in comparison to the violence in other full-length movies and in video games, which have also been linked to increases in aggressive behavior (Anderson & Bushman, 2001). The clear implication from here is that if you don’t want your children to be aggressive or violent, keep them away from violent media, and even away from toy weapons that might encourage aggressive behavior all on their own. That doesn’t mean you won’t end up with an aggressive child—some children are just naturally more aggressive than others—but it’s certainly a start.

References

Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12, 353-359.

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 3-11.

Berkowitz, L., & LePage, A. (1967). Weapons as aggression-eliciting stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7(2p1), 202-207.

Dillon, K. P., & Bushman, B. J. (2017, in press). Effects of Exposure to Gun Violence in Movies on Children’s Interest in Real Guns. JAMA pediatrics.

Bushman, B. J., Kerwin, T., Whitlock, T., & Weisenberger, J. M. (2017). The weapons effect on wheels: Motorists drive more aggressively when there is a gun in the vehicle. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 82-85.

Benjamin Jr, A. J., Kepes, S., & Bushman, B. J. (2017, in press). Effects of weapons on aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, hostile appraisals, and aggressive behavior: a meta-analytic review of the weapons effect literature. Personality and Social Psychology Teview.
 

Commodus

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2004
9,215
6,818
136
We have a culture that glorifies guns and promotes gun violence as the answer in movies, television, music videos, video games but it's all the NRA's fault who should be labeled a terrorist organization while the greatest promoters of gun violence get to hide behind the first amendment,

because we know children and adults alike can separate facts from fiction unless it's Russians using the same media, they can sway elections so they must be stopped.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...ent-media-and-aggressive-behavior-in-children

Violent Media and Aggressive Behavior in Children
Does watching violence on TV, in movies, or video games promote aggression?
Posted Jan 08, 2018



References

Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12, 353-359.

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 3-11.

Berkowitz, L., & LePage, A. (1967). Weapons as aggression-eliciting stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7(2p1), 202-207.

Dillon, K. P., & Bushman, B. J. (2017, in press). Effects of Exposure to Gun Violence in Movies on Children’s Interest in Real Guns. JAMA pediatrics.

Bushman, B. J., Kerwin, T., Whitlock, T., & Weisenberger, J. M. (2017). The weapons effect on wheels: Motorists drive more aggressively when there is a gun in the vehicle. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 82-85.

Benjamin Jr, A. J., Kepes, S., & Bushman, B. J. (2017, in press). Effects of weapons on aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, hostile appraisals, and aggressive behavior: a meta-analytic review of the weapons effect literature. Personality and Social Psychology Teview.

Hint: virtually every country on the planet has access to violent video games and movies. Only the US has such a severe problem with mass shootings and other forms of gun violence. The problem is not whether Junior is playing the latest Call of Duty. The problem is the access to and lethality of guns.

Why is it that gun fetishists are so eager to destroy the 1st Amendment in order to protect an exaggerated interpretation of the 2nd?

(Also, why are most of the papers you cite co-written by the same "Bushman, B. J.?")
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,658
5,228
136
Only if they engage in terrorism, then it's not the President that declares it, it's law enforcement.
Also, the NRA does not sell guns, they sell memberships and advocate the rights of gun owners as a group.

No and Yes.

They are an advocacy group for gun owners and manufacturers.

They are heavily funded by gun manufacturers, and lobby in the same way PhRMA does for the drug industry.

A difference being that there is no Constitutional amendment to pharmaceuticals. As destructive as PhRMA can be (eg. How big pharma's money – and its politicians – feed the US opioid crisis, eg Pharma Lobby Group Sues to Bar California's Drug Price Law) they are not attacking opioid victims on Twitter, or calling for overthrow of the government, free media or other institutions to sell more drugs.
 
Reactions: IJTSSG

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
16,577
4,659
136
Except it has nothing to do with stupidity and everything to do with organised white supremacy. Look no further than former trump senior advisor steve bannon.

"Bannon told the crowd, “Let them call you racists. Let them call you xenophobes. Let them call you nativists,” The Post reported. “Wear it as a badge of honor. Because every day, we get stronger and they get weaker.”

Good attempt at downplaying the far right extremism associated with donald trump though.

EDIT: I cannot wait for bannon to finally make his true feelings about the jews known. I think if he keeps speaking at far right conferences he will be quoted as saying hitler didn't go far enough soon.


Why stop there? Soon he'll be saying "we took real good care of our slaves".
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |