New York sues to break up NRA, accuses it of corruption

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

Sorry but you are a bit confused about how it works.

 

If someone says the NRA is involved in laundering money then that person has to adduce the evidence. The burden of proof is on the person making the allegation.

 

I note that so far not a single piece of evidence has been posted to show that the NRA has engaged in laundering money. Not one.

 

It's almost as if the NRA does not in fact launder money.

Agree. But you don't just say that, you go further and state 'nra did not launder'. A statement one shouldn't make without proof.

[Eric Loh]

16 minutes ago, Logosone said:

They just pointed out that the initial Democrat report contained a number of conclusions that were overblown and unwarranted, as well as clear exaggerations.

 

21,000 USD paid in travel expenses. Big deal.

And you believe all that bs. ????

[Logosone]

14 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Agree. But you don't just say that, you go further and state 'nra did not launder'. A statement one shouldn't make without proof.

No, you see there is a presumption of innocence. Unless the NRA has been convicted of money laundering it is DE FACTO innocent of money laundering, unless it is subsequently convicted based on compelling evidence.

 

I note not only does this compelling evidence not exist, but is confined to the Russia fairytale investigation.

 

Not exactly convincing.

[Phoenix Rising]

7 minutes ago, Logosone said:

No, you see there is a presumption of innocence. Unless the NRA has been convicted of money laundering it is DE FACTO innocent of money laundering, unless it is subsequently convicted based on compelling evidence.

 

I note not only does this compelling evidence not exist, but is confined to the Russia fairytale investigation.

You have repeatedly made that claim and have repeatedly been asked to back it up with facts. Since you're unable to one can only assume you express a wish, nothing more. 

Edited August 7, 2020 by Phoenix Rising

[Scott]

Troll post and replies reported and removed. 

 

[Logosone]

26 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

You have repeatedly made that claim and have repeatedly been asked to back it up with facts. Since you're unable to one can only assume you express a wish, nothing more. 

Excuse me, I'm not implying the NRA laundered money. Others are.

 

I don't have to prove a thing. I'm not making any allegations. Those making the allegations have to prove them.

 

So far we've had a link to the old Russia fairytale from the FBI. 

 

So nothing basically.

[MikeN]

11 hours ago, PatOngo said:

Time to go to school, wherrre's ma gun?

Time to go to anti mask protest, where's ma gun ?

[kingdong]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 Prosecuting crimes committed within the jurisdiction of her office are definitely within her responsibility.

 

And she on it.

pity she wasn,t "on it" regarding corona.

[Greenside]

4 hours ago, Logosone said:

Let's say, for argument's sake, no evidence has been provided, but just for argument's sake, LaPierre had misappropriated funds from the NRA.

 

In that case the NRA is the VICTIM, and it is LaPierre who should have been indicted, not the NRA. 

 

However, the fact that Letitia James does not even hide that her aim is to dissolve the NRA very clearly shows that this is a politically motivated action, and not a bona fide pursuit of criminals.

 

And of course Lapierre is innocent until found guilty, if at all. So far there is abolutely no criminality, no conviction, no nothing.

 

 

If an officer of the NRA acting in his or her official capacity regularly signed off on the use of NRA funds for inappropriate personal expenditure and the accounts passed audit then it's the company who should be indicted.

[Logosone]

5 minutes ago, Greenside said:

If an officer of the NRA acting in his or her official capacity regularly signed off on the use of NRA funds for inappropriate personal expenditure and the accounts passed audit then it's the company who should be indicted.

The NRA is not a company.

 

And of course that's completely false. When Carlos Ghosn was accused of misappropriating funds it was him personally that was indicted, not Nissan.

Edited August 7, 2020 by Logosone

[Chomper Higgot]

$64,000,000 redirected to a handful of individuals within the NRA.

 

They and a few others might want to believe there is no paper trail.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, Logosone said:

The NRA is not a company.

 

And of course that's completely false. When Carlos Ghosn was accused of misappropriating funds it was him personally that was indicted, not Nissan.

We’ve already agreed what the NRA is an what statutes govern it’s activities.

[IAMHERE]

14 hours ago, Puchaiyank said:

New York and California should just set up their own independent governments...they are so out of step with the rest of the nation...

 

Then they could burn, loot, and kill one another...and no one would care...

I'd care because I live in the part of America that pays the taxes to bail these socialist States out of their debts. I'd be ok with selling them to Canada.

[IAMHERE]

Corruption in New York; they finally found some, well done.

[scorecard]

13 hours ago, Logosone said:

And of course 99% of NRA members are peaceful and law-abiding citizens.

Well if they are straight up good, peaceful and law abiding citizens why do they belong to such a scaly and corrupt organization?

[scorecard]

"There's already is sensible gun control legislation."

 

Response: So that's why we still see so many gun shows and (although there's waiting periods and other stuff) pretty much anybody can buy guns and in some states personal registrations of guns produces no controls and none of this really assesses whether individuals have psychological or other problems which should totally bar them from owning guns (any guns), so many folks have arsenals, people can walk around with guns, walk into shops etc., with hand guns, kids in school rooms with hand guns in some states, hardly a sign of a civil peaceful society. Further If the police and army are not effectively maintain a society where public guns are not needed then change the police etc.

 

"And the real issue is people, guns don't kill people. People kill people."

 

Response: 'Guns don't kill people .....' Are you real. This is the silliest comment possible, the reality is that if the public didn't have guns then they wouldn't be able to shoot each other people. Kids wouldn't shoot up their schools and other kids, people wouldn't shoot/kill mass numbers of folks at shopping malls etc.   

 

 

 

 

Edited August 8, 2020 by scorecard

[kingdong]

37 minutes ago, scorecard said:

"There's already is sensible gun control legislation."

 

Response: So that's why we still see so many gun shows and (although there's waiting periods and other stuff) pretty much anybody can buy guns and in some states personal registrations of guns produces no controls and none of this really assesses whether individuals have psychological or other problems which should totally bar them from owning guns (any guns), so many folks have arsenals, people can walk around with guns, walk into shops etc., with hand guns, kids in school rooms with hand guns in some states, hardly a sign of a civil peaceful society. Further If the police and army are not effectively maintain a society where public guns are not needed then change the police etc.

 

"And the real issue is people, guns don't kill people. People kill people."

 

Response: 'Guns don't kill people .....' Are you real. This is the silliest comment possible, the reality is that if the public didn't have guns then they wouldn't be able to shoot each other people. Kids wouldn't shoot up their schools and other kids, people wouldn't shoot/kill mass numbers of folks at shopping malls etc.   

 

 

 

 

guns can also be used to defend oneself and members of ones family should the need arise,ever been in that situation?or if you have did the boys in blue turn up in the nick of time?

[animalmagic]

12 hours ago, Logosone said:

Sorry, but the links you posted refer to the NRA introducing Russian people to its associates in the US.

 

There is absolutely no mention whatsoever of money laundering in those articles.

 

So I guess you have no evidence of money laundering on the part of the NRA then?

As referred to earlier by others this is an opinion and discussion forum, not a court of law where all evidence is to be produced and examined for veracity.  There does appear to be a mention of money laundering activities.

If you would like to read the second link more closely you will find - "deepening federal scrutiny of the NRA’s ties with two Russian operatives: Alexander Torshin, who is suspected of Russian mob activity and money laundering by international authorities and was sanctioned by the US government last year,"

 

[Logosone]

1 hour ago, animalmagic said:

As referred to earlier by others this is an opinion and discussion forum, not a court of law where all evidence is to be produced and examined for veracity.  There does appear to be a mention of money laundering activities.

If you would like to read the second link more closely you will find - "deepening federal scrutiny of the NRA’s ties with two Russian operatives: Alexander Torshin, who is suspected of Russian mob activity and money laundering by international authorities and was sanctioned by the US government last year,"

 

I think you should read it more closely, since it says that it was Mr Alexander Torshin who is "suspected" of money laundering. Not the NRA.

 

Torshin is of course not a "Russian operative", he was a former secretary of the Bank of Russia and a member of the Upper House of Russia.

 

The "international authorities" who suspect Torshin of money laundering are the Spanish btw. Torshin is on tape advising Russian associates on the best way to invest money in real estate and banks. 

 

There is no suggestion in that article that the NRA itself laundered money.

[Logosone]

2 hours ago, scorecard said:

"There's already is sensible gun control legislation."

 

Response: So that's why we still see so many gun shows and (although there's waiting periods and other stuff) pretty much anybody can buy guns and in some states personal registrations of guns produces no controls and none of this really assesses whether individuals have psychological or other problems which should totally bar them from owning guns (any guns), so many folks have arsenals, people can walk around with guns, walk into shops etc., with hand guns, kids in school rooms with hand guns in some states, hardly a sign of a civil peaceful society. Further If the police and army are not effectively maintain a society where public guns are not needed then change the police etc.

 

It is absolutely wonderful that there are so many gun shows in the US. Indeed there are many thousands of gun shows world wide, in every single country in the world, from Sweden to Japan to Ireland to Hong Kong.

 

I have been to many gun shows have you ever gone to one? Wonderful affairs with rare and beautiful rifles guns, knives, swords and sabres, with knowledgeable experts and buyers looking at old historic weapons, new and innovative companies showing off their latest new inventions. You don't know what you're missing.

 

Of course there should be gun fairs because many millions of people collect guns and use guns for sport. What would give you the idea that gun shows are a problem or somehow related to gun crime? They are not, every gun sold at a gun show is documented and sold only to people who have the required paperwork to own guns.

 

You seem to think that it's a free for all in terms of gun ownership in the US. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

Here is a list of just the federal laws regulating gun ownership, distribution and manufcature in the US:

 

• National Firearms Act ("NFA") (1934)
• Federal Firearms Act of 1938 ("FFA")
• Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (1968)
• Gun Control Act of 1968 ("GCA")
• Firearm Owners Protection Act ("FOPA") (1986)
• Undetectable Firearms Act (1988)
• Gun-Free School Zones Act (1990): 
• Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (1993):
• Federal Assault Weapons Ban (1994–2004): 
• Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (2004): 
• Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (2005)

 

You claim that people with psychological problems have no problems in buying a gun. That's just not true. The law clearly provides that fugitives, those convicted of a felony with a sentence exceeding 1 year, past or present, and those who were involuntarily admitted to a mental facility are prohibited from purchasing a firearm.

 

In fact the Gun Control Act makes it unlawful for certain categories of people to ship, transport, receive, or possess firearms or ammunition, to include any person:

 

• convicted in any court of a "crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year";^[30]
• who is a fugitive from justice;
• any person under indictment for a "crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year"^[30]
• who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act,^[31] codified at 21 U.S.C. § 802);
• who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;
• who is an illegal alien (i.e. an undocumented immigrant);^[32]
• who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;
• who has renounced their United States nationality/citizenship;
• who is subject to a court order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of the intimate partner; or
• who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence

According to the US Sentencing Commission, approximately 5,000 to 6,000 people a year are convicted of receiving or possessing a firearm against one of the prohibitions above.

 

In 2017, over 25.2 million actual background checks were performed in total.

 

So, yes, there is very sensible legislation in place in the US.

[Logosone]

Quote

Response: 'Guns don't kill people .....' Are you real. This is the silliest comment possible, the reality is that if the public didn't have guns then they wouldn't be able to shoot each other people. Kids wouldn't shoot up their schools and other kids, people wouldn't shoot/kill mass numbers of folks at shopping malls etc.   

No it's not silly. I have been around many guns, held many guns, never been killed. Because guns don't kill people, people kill people.

 

You seem to think that people don't get killed without guns. You're wrong. You seem to think that people can't get hold of guns against the law. You're wrong.

 

 

[rabas]

2 hours ago, scorecard said:

And the real issue is people, guns don't kill people. People kill people."

 

Response: 'Guns don't kill people .....' Are you real. This is the silliest comment possible, the reality is that if the public didn't have guns then they wouldn't be able to shoot each other people. Kids wouldn't shoot up their schools and other kids, people wouldn't shoot/kill mass numbers of folks at shopping malls etc.   

 

 

Given the choice, I would much rather live in a world of normal people with guns than a world of crazies without guns who want to go around killing for no reason. The first is the one I grew up in.  The insanity is new and the problem that must be fixed. When I was 10, I would buy bullets at the grocery store, alone, and we never had these crazy problems.

 

To be pedantic, guns don't kill people, bullets do. Meaning such arguments miss to truth.

 

[Oliver Holzerfilled]

New York sues to break up N̶R̶A̶ NBA, accuses it of corruption.  ????????

[scorecard]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

 

It is absolutely wonderful that there are so many gun shows in the US. Indeed there are many thousands of gun shows world wide, in every single country in the world, from Sweden to Japan to Ireland to Hong Kong.

 

I have been to many gun shows have you ever gone to one? Wonderful affairs with rare and beautiful rifles guns, knives, swords and sabres, with knowledgeable experts and buyers looking at old historic weapons, new and innovative companies showing off their latest new inventions. You don't know what you're missing.

 

Of course there should be gun fairs because many millions of people collect guns and use guns for sport. What would give you the idea that gun shows are a problem or somehow related to gun crime? They are not, every gun sold at a gun show is documented and sold only to people who have the required paperwork to own guns.

 

You seem to think that it's a free for all in terms of gun ownership in the US. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

Here is a list of just the federal laws regulating gun ownership, distribution and manufcature in the US:

 

• National Firearms Act ("NFA") (1934)
• Federal Firearms Act of 1938 ("FFA")
• Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (1968)
• Gun Control Act of 1968 ("GCA")
• Firearm Owners Protection Act ("FOPA") (1986)
• Undetectable Firearms Act (1988)
• Gun-Free School Zones Act (1990): 
• Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (1993):
• Federal Assault Weapons Ban (1994–2004): 
• Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (2004): 
• Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (2005)

 

You claim that people with psychological problems have no problems in buying a gun. That's just not true. The law clearly provides that fugitives, those convicted of a felony with a sentence exceeding 1 year, past or present, and those who were involuntarily admitted to a mental facility are prohibited from purchasing a firearm.

 

In fact the Gun Control Act makes it unlawful for certain categories of people to ship, transport, receive, or possess firearms or ammunition, to include any person:

 

• convicted in any court of a "crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year";^[30]
• who is a fugitive from justice;
• any person under indictment for a "crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year"^[30]
• who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act,^[31] codified at 21 U.S.C. § 802);
• who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;
• who is an illegal alien (i.e. an undocumented immigrant);^[32]
• who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;
• who has renounced their United States nationality/citizenship;
• who is subject to a court order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of the intimate partner; or
• who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence

According to the US Sentencing Commission, approximately 5,000 to 6,000 people a year are convicted of receiving or possessing a firearm against one of the prohibitions above.

 

In 2017, over 25.2 million actual background checks were performed in total.

 

So, yes, there is very sensible legislation in place in the US.

"It is absolutely wonderful that there are so many gun shows in the US. Indeed there are many thousands of gun shows world wide, in every single country in the world, from Sweden to Japan to Ireland to Hong Kong."

 

Not true, and you should be ashamed of posting totally wrong/incorrect words/fake news/ deliberately fake details:

 

- ...In every single country in the world... definitely not true and in many countries 99% of the citizens don't want guns, don't want to buy guns and don't want gun shows and gun shows are completely illegal.

 

....gun shows in Japan and Hong Kong.  This is not true in any way. Especially not true in Japan

because of the laws imposed on Japan after the second world war which are strongly wanted/accepted by Japanese society today.

 

Twice when I was working on large engineering projects in Jap Americans were caught at customs on arrival with hand guns and ammunition in the check-in luggage and it made big news. The offenders tried to claim because they were from the USA they were exempt from Japanese law. It didn't work. They were held, fined very heavily, banned from further entry to Japan and deported on the spot. 

 

Seems that you need to expand your global knowledge and awareness that there are other societies in the world, many which think very differently, have very different values than yours.

 

Are you aware that in many countries people don't go hunting? They respect all life and see it as totally gross. inhumane, inexcusably wrong to just shoot animals and then leave them. 

 

 

 

Edited August 8, 2020 by scorecard

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

<snip>

every gun sold at a gun show is documented and sold only to people who have the required paperwork to own guns.

 

You seem to think that it's a free for all in terms of gun ownership in the US. Nothing could be further from the truth.

<snip>

ID indicating over 21, and free to go with that gun.

Documented, no way.

[Logosone]

2 hours ago, scorecard said:

"It is absolutely wonderful that there are so many gun shows in the US. Indeed there are many thousands of gun shows world wide, in every single country in the world, from Sweden to Japan to Ireland to Hong Kong."

 

Not true, and you should be ashamed of posting totally wrong/incorrect words/fake news/ deliberately fake details:

 

- ...In every single country in the world... definitely not true and in many countries 99% of the citizens don't want guns, don't want to buy guns and don't want gun shows and gun shows are completely illegal.

 

....gun shows in Japan and Hong Kong.  This is not true in any way. Especially not true in Japan

because of the laws imposed on Japan after the second world war which are strongly wanted/accepted by Japanese society today.

 

Twice when I was working on large engineering projects in Jap Americans were caught at customs on arrival with hand guns and ammunition in the check-in luggage and it made big news. The offenders tried to claim because they were from the USA they were exempt from Japanese law. It didn't work. They were held, fined very heavily, banned from further entry to Japan and deported on the spot. 

 

Seems that you need to expand your global knowledge and awareness that there are other societies in the world, many which think very differently, have very different values than yours.

 

Are you aware that in many countries people don't go hunting? They respect all life and see it as totally gross. inhumane, inexcusably wrong to just shoot animals and then leave them. 

 

 

 

No YOU don't want guns, you don't want gun shows and you want to impose this restrictive, boring, vanilla life on everyone else. 

 

Unfortunately you don't know what you're talking about. 60 million households in the United states own guns or rifles.

 

In Germany there are 5,8 million registered guns, in France 4,5 million, in Canada 2 million, in Thailand 6 million, in India 10 million, all around the world millions of people collect guns or use guns in sports. Just because you don't gives you no right to tell other people to do what you do.

 

You think there are no weapons fairs in Japan? Think again:

 

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/11/18/business/defense-equipment-exhibition-japan/

 

There are weapons fairs in every major developed country in the world. Because many people collect antique guns or use guns in sports.

 

Looks like you need expand your global knowledge and awareness.

 

And now you want to ban hunting on top? Do you have any idea how many people enjoy to go hunting?

 

It's because of people like you I have to pay premium prices when I order from Frankonia.

 

Edited August 8, 2020 by Logosone

[Phoenix Rising]

16 hours ago, Logosone said:

Excuse me, I'm not implying the NRA laundered money. Others are.

 

I don't have to prove a thing. I'm not making any allegations. Those making the allegations have to prove them.

You're claiming categorically that "this compelling evidence not exist". You're not implying this, you're stating it as a fact.

Are you gonna back up your claims or should I regard it as your personal opinion disguised as facts?

[Phoenix Rising]

4 hours ago, kingdong said:

guns can also be used to defend oneself and members of ones family should the need arise,ever been in that situation?or if you have did the boys in blue turn up in the nick of time?

Yes, next question please.

[simple1]

20 minutes ago, Logosone said:

<SNIP>You think there are no weapons fairs in Japan? Think again:

 

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/11/18/business/defense-equipment-exhibition-japan/ <SNIP>

It is regrettable you post spin / disinformation.  A military defence weapons show has nothing to do with the OP. The OP is in regard to alleged extensive corruption by identified senior executives at the NRA.

Edited August 8, 2020 by simple1

[Phoenix Rising]

3 hours ago, Logosone said:

No it's not silly. I have been around many guns, held many guns, never been killed. Because guns don't kill people, people kill people.

 

You seem to think that people don't get killed without guns. You're wrong. You seem to think that people can't get hold of guns against the law. You're wrong.

 

 

LOL, you seem to think that those are valid arguments for the present gun laws. You're wrong.

 

"You seem to think that people can't get hold of guns heroin against the law. You're wrong."

 

Still a valid argument?