Amid reports the Justice Department is weighing banning transgender people from owning firearms in response to last month’s mass shooting at a Minneapolis Catholic church, the National Rifle Association said Friday it will oppose any blanket rule that limits Second Amendment rights.
Their declaration comes after CNN and other outlets reported that Justice Department leadership is considering whether it can use its rulemaking authority declare that people who are transgender are mentally ill and can lose their rights to possess firearms.
Are they merely saying it? Or, ard they actually saying it? Basically, is their money behind it? Or, is this just a publicity stunt?
I thought the NRA went bankrupt?
It’s nice to see the gun organization likes guns more than they hate trans people
really surprising, they’ve been given similar choices before and have historically fought against the 2a rights of minorities
Big talk. They endorsed Trump in 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rifle_Association#Elections
I’ll believe it when I see it
Weird times when the NRA and trans people share a common goal.
The NRA is the lobby group for gun manufacturers, and trans people are relatively well-armed. They would lose sales, that’s literally the entirety of their reasoning.
Also, bringing attention to attempts to limit guns promotes people buying guns. So, no surprise they’d try to get publicity for this to motivate more trans people to arm themselves.
More trans people should arm themselves, in fairness.
Having arms is rather handy.
The NRA is owned by Putin’s allies, if not directly.
Trump doesn’t want armed minorities. Trust me
Sorry, did I stutter? Trump isn’t in charge, FFS. 🤦🏼♂️
No, but you seem to have forgotten that Trump is on Putin’s payroll
The enemy of my enemy and all that shit.
A broken clock…
Next mental illness: empathy
The NRA is a lobby group for the gun industry, and maximizing revenue through gun sales.
This is a fucking golden moment for the NRA to get a flood of support (money spent on firearms) from the left.
They can use the identical rhetoric about the government being jackbooted thugs, but this time they’d be accurate instead of hyperbolic.
2A for all. If they’ve got guns, we should, too
Not surprising. In a civil war, the only one who wins is the person selling the guns.
Whoa whoa whoa second amendment folks! Right? RIGHT?!
I’m positive the NRA supports the transgender ban. In their past they supported the Mulford Act when the Black Panthers were copwatching.
My bet is they’ll say second amendment today to save face and instead push for any changes to be only related to diagnosed mental illness. Then they’ll be silent when the transgender community is thrown into that category during a second legislative pass.
Honestly, knowing the dire straights the NRA has been in the past 10 years or so, it wouldn’t be a bad time to try and rebrand. Right wingers aren’t nearly as big fans of them anymore after they’ve rolled over on basically every gun rights case that’s come up, so I’m kinda hoping this is an actual attempt at doing something.
Gosh, I hope you’re correct. I would love to be wrong in my prediction.
I’m certainly not holding my breath, but it wouldn’t be a bad hail-Mary play for them
It was a very different organization then. They really radicalized in the 80s. They became less focused on gun safety and hunters/target shooters and more focused on tacticool loonies.
Those tacticool loonies would support a transgender ban and the NRA supports red flag laws. Pass a red flag law and then let congress mark transgender people as red flagged. I’m sure the NRA won’t loose a single tacticool loonie’s membership with such an action.
They have to get ahead of this. Because once it starts with trans, it’ll move to another group with a bigger base. Guns gotta keep flowing for the NRA.
As a gun owner and enthusiast, I encourage all Americans to exercise their rights. Also, NRA can go to hell. They’re just a huge money grab. I’m a GOA member myself.
How is the GOA? I’ve been looking at 2A groups, but I don’t want to be lumped in with a bunch of maga chuds
I would not have called that one.
Oppose as in, the same level of action against a ban that they have done for other restrictions in the past? Doubt.
Yeah, are they lobbying Congress to oppose it? Will their NRA rating decrease if they support the ban? Are they threatening to fund primary challengers? Will there be a trans speaker at the next convention saying “from my cold dead hands”?
There’s a difference between a strongly worded letter responding to an immediate question of the day and actual action.
so far the news is only that the executive branch is pursuing this, and this news is only a few days old. This is their first response to the matter.
No organization can move quickly enough to already be doing the things you suggest at this point. This is the make a statement of intent phase, which they have done.
Give it time, nothing happens immediately.
Why? We’ve seen their anemic responses to minority gun issues before (Philando Castile). There’s no reason to assume good faith from an organization that’s been a thinly veiled Republican PAC for decades now.
agreed, but at this stage expecting more than a statement is unreasonable. no organization could be in full go mode this early.
their actions to come will be telling.
What’s the historical rate for their other responses to gun control attempts?
I suspect if they really wanted to, they could.
