I agree that this is a perfect time for USAA to pick up the slack left by the caving First National Bank. I have "chatted" several times with representatives several times in the last month and have been unable to get a straight answer from any of their representatives as to their stance concerning the NRA. I am ready to switch all my banking to USAA, but will not do so until I am assured they are any better than the First National Bank. When I joined USAA a few years ago, I was proud to belong to the organization. Unless they step up to the plate, that pride may prove to have been misplaced. I may have to keep looking, not only for banking needs, but the insurance policies I currently have with USAA. Come on USAA, let us know where you stand.
I would leave USAA if they took a stance in support of the NRA. Tougher regulations on purchasing "arms" are desperately needed and overdue. I'm a supporter of hunting and the owning of guns/bows for the sport but we do need more thorough licensing and background checks. Let's cease and destroy ALL semi/auto assault weapons; their mere existence is a pity. I'm so proud of pioneering companies like Dick's Sporting Goods. Wise and effective decisions are finally being made by sensible people at "the top." Cool, cool, cool.
Correction. The NRA does NOT defend anything. It is a public entity whose purpose is to front for and protect weapons manufactrers, sellerrs, and investors in those companies by leveraging fiducial leverage over politicians. A longg time ago, the NRA did good things about promoting gun and hunting safety, but prostituted itself long ago. No group or individual who espouses the need for semi- or full-auto weapons is remotely sane or reasonable. The Second Amendment is NIOT license to kill..a deliberate pun. Firearm ownership isn’t the issue: owning any firearm with functioning similar/identical to an AR-15 or AK-47 is without merit. Escept to a fringe group of nutjobs who really shouldn’t be allowed to own firearms. Perhaps being an NRA member/overt supporter should be one litmus test for who can buy ANY firearm. I own one rifle, but would saw it in half if it helped keep one baby safe. Would you? And don’t forget: there are multiple Amendments to the Constitution: not just #2. Your constitutional rights end when they impact another’s constitutional rights...including life. Grow up.
AR-15s have been around since the mid-60s. Now all of a sudden "they" are the problem? Instead of making harder targets for criminals, they are trying to make a soft target out of the whole US. That's not what I fought for. I have a gun, and I would not saw it in half and leave myself unable to defend by own "babies."
Thank you, Oldesoldier, for your sage wisdom!
The right to bear arms is not an absolute right, as Justice Antonin Scalia opined shortly before his death. It comes with a condition that is often overlooked. That condition, which is spelled out in the amendment's opening clause, specifies that the right be "well regulated". At present, the availability of guns in society at large is anything but well regulated. As a Navy veteran of Vietnam, it is easier for me to obtain an assault weapon at a gun show than it was from my ship's armory during combat operations
I support the right to bear arms for the purpose of self-defense, organized sport and hunting. I also support the unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This God-given right, however, is being denied by the proliferation of assault weapons, and the carnage which they render. It is time for legislators, citizens and, yes, responsible corporations, to go beyond the "thoughts and prayers" response to the mounting gun violence and take real action to implement the well regulated provisions on the right to bear arms, as the Second Amendment guarantees.
Reading over a lot of comments… I see where a lot of the issue is…
People do not understand the purpose of the 2nd amendment…. People still have this misconception that it is about hunting and it is not….
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Yes it does talk about a Militia on the first part and being ell-regulated…. I do feel people should be trained on the weapons… And the first part also tell you what it is about.. keeping us FREE not about hunting..
That is where the Militia part of this stops.. why …. Because we start talking about the people who are the Milita…. The right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed…..
The 2nd amendment is by far the most important… why… because when all else fails… that is your last resort…
A lot of the first amendment has failed.. it is not just about free speech… there are five parts to it…
Freedom of Speech
Freedom of Religion
Freedom of the Press <HAS FAILED> I was the job of the media to keep the government in check by reporting … but now they are in the governments pocket..
Redress of grievances… <not working as it should> Our elected officials are no longer listening to the people.
Freedom of Assembly.<not really working anymore> We are supposed to work as a collective to let our elected officials know.