Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

NRA Removes Video That Called For Arming The Blind


elvis15

Recommended Posts

NRA Removes Video That Called For Arming The Blind

The National Rifle Association has yanked a video posted to one of its websites this week that advocated for the right of blind people to carry guns.

The video, titled “Firearms and the Blind,” featured NRA commentator Dom Raso, who argued that a person doesn’t need to see to be able to fire a gun.

“Do you think you need to see where you’re shooting if someone is on top of you trying to kill or rape you, while their hands are slowly squeezing your neck and they're yelling ‘I’m going to kill you'? I didn't think so,” Raso said.

The video had been posted to YouTube as well as the NRA News website.

On Thursday afternoon, the YouTube video was gone, bearing only the message: "This video has been removed by the user." The page on the NRA News site where the video had appeared now showed the message: "404 Page Not Found."

An NRA spokesperson did not immediately respond to TPM's request for comment.

The video drew complaints from some supporters of the visually impaired in Massachusetts, according to Boston.com. The former president of Perkins School for the Blind and a candidate running for Massachusetts attorney general teamed up Thursday in criticizing the NRA for the “insensitive video.”

“The fact that the NRA would exploit blind people to push their extreme agenda with this insensitive video is just wrong,” Warren Tolman, candidate for Massachusetts attorney general said in a statement to Boston.com. “As Attorney General, I will not back down when the NRA tries to stop common sense gun reform in Massachusetts and I will stand up to them to make smart gun technology a reality.”

It is unclear whether the video was removed in response to the criticism. TPM was unable to confirm when exactly the video was removed.

I'll chalk it up to some people just being stupid. I mean, c'mon, is doing the right thing really less important than getting your way in a larger agenda? This applies to politics, religion, anything since we're seeing so much stupidity in so many areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kind of hard not to, when the NRA is an American organization...

I guess people get to trash Vancouver then for Stephen Harper, or claim Vancouver hates foreigners due to bill C-24. How about Vancouver hates freedoms because of Officer Bubbles? I mean, it happened in Canada. :)

Would fit with your argument perfectly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyways, the whole point of the link posted was to whine at the NRA for posting an "insensitive video". Damn those insensitive gun nuts for trying to get guns in the hands of the blind! Even though it's actually a right..

Of course, it must also be insensitive or politically contrived to vie for the rights of free speech for mutes since they can't speak.

What's weird is, I support the second amendment, yet, I'd never know what the NRA is saying if it weren't for gun control supporting liberals who seem to read NRA stuff significantly more than I do (by significantly more it means.. I never read anything the NRA says outside of some gun control activist telling me something the NRA posted or what some NRA spokesman said).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyways, the whole point of the link posted was to whine at the NRA for posting an "insensitive video". Damn those insensitive gun nuts for trying to get guns in the hands of the blind! Even though it's actually a right..

Of course, it must also be insensitive or politically contrived to vie for the rights of free speech for mutes since they can't speak.

What's weird is, I support the second amendment, yet, I'd never know what the NRA is saying if it weren't for gun control supporting liberals who seem to read NRA stuff significantly more than I do (by significantly more it means.. I never read anything the NRA says outside of some gun control activist telling me something the NRA posted or what some NRA spokesman said).

Somebody's listening if the NRA is saying it, particularly the US government. I'd rather both sides of the argument were listening rather than just the government hearing it from lobbyists.

And I'd say it's a bit more than just point out it was insensitive, but it would fall in the category or "what won't they do to push their agenda?" Sure, a blind person could own a gun, but to realistically carry one for personal protection? Whoever came up with that idea seems to have their common sense voice muted in their head.

Even DareDevil doesn't use guns.

Daredevil-marvel-comics-14713822-256-442

(or rarely does):

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=44578

http://www.theothermurdockpapers.com/2013/07/daredevils-goofiest-billy-club-gadgets/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody's listening if the NRA is saying it, particularly the US government. I'd rather both sides of the argument were listening rather than just the government hearing it from lobbyists.

And I'd say it's a bit more than just point out it was insensitive, but it would fall in the category or "what won't they do to push their agenda?" Sure, a blind person could own a gun, but to realistically carry one for personal protection? Whoever came up with that idea seems to have their common sense voice muted in their head.

Even DareDevil doesn't use guns.

Daredevil-marvel-comics-14713822-256-442

(or rarely does):

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=44578

http://www.theothermurdockpapers.com/2013/07/daredevils-goofiest-billy-club-gadgets/

Their agenda is to get more gun owners to register with their association, since that's how they make money. There's no hiding that. Of course, where are all the remarks from those calling this "insensitive" telling Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton to put a cork in it for turning so many non-issues into race bait? It's not about being insensitive, it's just people diametrically opposed politically to the NRA making a fuss to try and shut them up. I suppose using disabled people, to these people, might provide some leverage against the NRA, except the NRA is one of the least politically correct organizations around, so good luck with that I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody's listening if the NRA is saying it, particularly the US government. I'd rather both sides of the argument were listening rather than just the government hearing it from lobbyists.

And I'd say it's a bit more than just point out it was insensitive, but it would fall in the category or "what won't they do to push their agenda?" Sure, a blind person could own a gun, but to realistically carry one for personal protection? Whoever came up with that idea seems to have their common sense voice muted in their head.

Even DareDevil doesn't use guns.

Daredevil-marvel-comics-14713822-256-442

(or rarely does):

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=44578

http://www.theothermurdockpapers.com/2013/07/daredevils-goofiest-billy-club-gadgets/

You wouldn't be saying that if you actually watched the video I posted ;) It's TOTALLY realistic to carry one for personal protection as long as it's a fully automatic weapon with an extended magazine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their agenda is to get more gun owners to register with their association, since that's how they make money. There's no hiding that. Of course, where are all the remarks from those calling this "insensitive" telling Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton to put a cork in it for turning so many non-issues into race bait? It's not about being insensitive, it's just people diametrically opposed politically to the NRA making a fuss to try and shut them up. I suppose using disabled people, to these people, might provide some leverage against the NRA, except the NRA is one of the least politically correct organizations around, so good luck with that I guess.

You got a thread on that? I'll call it insensitive/stupid/etc. ::D

You wouldn't be saying that if you actually watched the video I posted ;) It's TOTALLY realistic to carry one for personal protection as long as it's a fully automatic weapon with an extended magazine

I watched it, and they let that inflatable pool animal get away!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You wouldn't be saying that if you actually watched the video I posted ;) It's TOTALLY realistic to carry one for personal protection as long as it's a fully automatic weapon with an extended magazine

The best idea is to give them a gatling gun like the one from The Purge: Anarchy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...