NRA Decides Constitutionality???

In the annals of lawsuits, this one has to rank right up there with the old woman who sued McDonalds (and won) for making the coffee too hot and she was burned when she foolishly spilled it between her legs.  Who’s suing who, you ask?  The plaintiff in the case, the sue-er, is none other than the infamous National Rifle Association, the NRA.  The defendant, the sue-ee, is the State of Florida.  And why, you ask, is the NRA suing Florida?  Because the State of Florida had the cojones to stand up and do something about the foolish free-for-all with guns that led to the tragedy in Parkland, Florida, on February 14th.  The State of Florida took the bull by the horns, listened to the grief stricken voices of the Parkland survivors last month, and said, “ENOUGH!!!!!”  My hat is off, and my thumbs are up to the Florida State Legislature and Governor Rick Scott.

First, let us look at the bill that was passed by the Florida State legislature, and then signed into law by Florida Governor Rick Scott on Friday.  The new law raises the minimum age to purchase a firearm from 18 to 21 and extends the waiting period to three days for the purchase of all firearms. It also gives law enforcement more power to seize weapons, prohibits the sale of “bump stocks” — devices that can be put on semi-automatic weapons to increase their rate of fire. The measure also allows some school personnel to be armed.  The bill is too little; it is, perhaps, merely an effort to pay lip service to the young people who have made a valiant and determined effort to stop the madness, but still, it is a start. A small step.  Small steps are better than no steps.  A journey of a thousand miles, as the saying goes, begins with a single step.

The NRA had been on a long leash, obviously, waiting and knowing the moment was coming, for they filed their suit only one hour after Governor Scott signed the bill into law.  Since when does a lobbyist group have the right to write the laws in this nation?  Since when does the NRA decide constitutionality???  Since when is the NRA the Supreme Law of the Land?

The NRA claims “We filed a lawsuit against the state for violating the constitutional rights of 18- to 21-year-olds.”  Seriously???  18-21-year-olds have a constitutional right to murder?  To buy and carry, concealed, a weapon that can cause mass destruction and take as many as 400 lives in a single 60-second minute?  That’s right, people … the gun the shooter in Parkland, Florida, used on 14 February was an AR-15, which can fire up to 400 rounds per minute.  And we believe that the founding fathers intended children age 18 to be in control of one of these weapons???

No, the NRA filed that suit because they were told by the people controlling their purse-strings to get rid of that law at all costs, for it might cost a few thousand sales to the gun industry.  Might also save a few thousand lives, but hey … no big deal, right?

Personally, I would have liked to see the law go even further, to include universal background checks and a ban on assault rifles.  And I would, again, have preferred not to call for armed personnel within the school.  However, I still must applaud especially Governor Scott, for it took courage for him to stand against the NRA.  Scott has previously had an A+ rating with the NRA, yet he ignored their threats and signed the bill.  For once, perhaps, he put the safety and the wishes of his constituency above the corrupt gun lobby.  And I also applaud the Florida Legislature, where 67 republicans with A ratings from the NRA also voted for the bill.

If Florida could do it, so can the rest of the states.  Come on Texas, South Carolina, Utah, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Minnesota … get off your collective patooties, grow some cojones, and follow suit.  Don’t let the NRA lawsuit worry you.  The public, the citizens, the voters stand behind stricter gun laws, and the lawmakers damn well better put a higher value on We The People than they do the NRA.  Most gun owners do not belong to the NRA.  The NRA actually represents a very small group of ordinary people.  Their bigger concern is the manufacturers and sellers of guns.  Just think, if every state in the nation passed even the watered-down law that Florida passed, the NRA would bankrupt itself filing lawsuits against every single state!

I wonder if I can file a lawsuit against the NRA, for here I sit at 5:00 a.m., seething as I write this story, drinking my umpteenth cup of coffee and eating pretzels with peanut-butter, as my fingers literally beat the printed letters off my laptop keyboard.  A rather unhealthy lifestyle caused by the angst of reading of the hypocrisy of the NRA.  I should think that at the very least I could sue for a new laptop, as I no longer have an “N” printed on the key between ‘B’ and ‘M’.

This nation has lost its way if we place more value on giving guns to 18-year-olds than we place on human life.  We have lost our way when lawmakers are actually unwilling to do their job for fear of reprisals from an unsavory organization like the NRA.  Wayne LaPierre is not one of our lawmakers.   We The People did not vote him into office, nor has he been, to the best of my knowledge, appointed to a judicial position.  There was a time I would have predicted that the suit by the NRA would have no teeth, no chance of winning.  Today, I am less sure.  I think the answer is for every state to pass similar, or even tougher gun laws.  Make the NRA spread themselves thin trying to keep up with all their lawsuits.  I know of no other answer, for the members of Congress have already shown us that our wishes, our very lives, have less value to them than their NRA funding.  This nation needs to stand up to the bullies in the gun industry … NOW!

46 thoughts on “NRA Decides Constitutionality???

  1. It is just unbelievable to me that damn near the entire nation is in favor of stricter gun laws and their elected officials don’t give a rat’s arse what their constituents want… I’m still shakin’ my head over this one.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I know … I have shook my head so much over this one that I finally shook something loose and I keep hearing a rattling sound up there! It is wrong, and it makes it very hard for me to call the U.S. a democracy and keep a straight face anymore. Our leaders both in the White House and in the Capitol have forgotten who employs them. They no longer even pretend to do what is in the best interest of the people of this nation. And that, my friend, is why we need to do some serious housecleaning in November, before it’s too late and they change the rules to take our vote away.

      Liked by 1 person

      • But DO we live in a true democracy? Isn’t our government actually a republic? And what’s the difference? I’m a little fuzzy on that. I know we try to combine the two and function as a “representative democracy.” Maybe it’s time for a NEW model? Right now it seems to be taken out of concept.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Technically, we are a democratic republic. The difference between this and a pure democracy is small, but important. In a democratic republic, there is a written charter, in our case the Constitution, that protects ‘certain inalienable rights’ that cannot be taken away by the government. In a pure democracy, however, the majority can impose it’s will on the minority. Still seems a fuzzy line, doesn’t it? Part of the reason it seems so fuzzy right now is that both branches of Congress and the Executive are held by the same part, the Republican Party. But think about it this way. Let’s look at that 2nd Amendment we’ve all talked so much about lately. The majority in this country actually favour a ban on assault weapons. In a pure democracy … this would be a no-brainer and the majority would rule, there would be a ban on the sale of assault weapons. But … since we have the Constitution and since it includes “the right to bear arms”, and since the framers of that document had no idea that such a thing as a gun that could fire 400 rounds per minute would be invented, they did not specify restrictions, so the interpretation is that the government cannot ban assault weapons. Now to further muddy the waters, if we had a democratic president and Congress, most likely a ban on assault weapons would be in process as we speak. Have I clarified, or just made it even fuzzier?

          I think that what it’s time for is a true multi-party system rather than a two-party system. Currently, no third-party, no matter how popular, stands a chance at the presidency. The rules are such that they cannot participate in debates unless they are polling at a certain level, they are ineligible for much of the funding available to republicans and democrats, and they cannot even get on the ballot in many states. We need more than two choices, for the two choices we currently have are not getting the job done, and have no competition other than each other. They are too polarized, and there is no middle ground, no moderate option.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Thanks for explaining that, Jill. I am ashamed to admit I did NOT pay attention in civics class! If we had to take the same test to become citizens that immigrants do, I’d be deported to the moon! And I agree about the 3rd party thing. But, practically, is there even a way to bring that about? You know darn well the R/D aren’t going to go there. They;d be too afraid.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Do NOT be ashamed for not knowing that. You wouldn’t have learned it in high school civics anyway. I have a MA in Political Science and the coursework completed for a Ph.D in International Relations, and I had to think about it for a few minutes when I read your question. For most people, the definitions aren’t very clear. To your other point, though … I did a post a couple of years ago, I think it was … let me see if I can find it … that focused on the citizenship, and I was astounded at how many U.S. citizens could not answer even the simplest questions! Yes, I found it … the title is Why Goats Can’t Vote … check it out if you feel like it … it’s an eye opener! Here’s a link: And don’t ever feel ashamed by what you don’t know … we all have areas in which we are knowledgeable, but nobody can know everything! 🤓


  2. It’s an interesting situation. Our governor here in Florida is on his last term. He is looking to run for the US Senate. He has been A+ rated by the NRA. I’m sure this rating will be impacted by this new law. I truly think Trump through him under the bus. We have the age limit of 21 in our new law and Trump just backed off of this restriction in the law he has empowered the ‘brilliant’ Betsy DeVos to implement. She was just on the Today Show and I felt my brain cells die as she spoke.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I didn’t realize until reading your comment that Scott was planning to run for U.S. Senate! I cannot help but wonder if there is something more to this than meets the eye. I find it hard to believe he would give up his A+ rating. And I am suspicious of the fact that the NRA filed suit within the hour after he signed the bill into law. Perhaps I am just paranoid, but I feel like I’m missing some part of this whole picture. And yes, Trump certainly didn’t waste any time before he did an about face!

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Well said — and you have every right to be outraged. The NRA has sold the nation a bill of goods, re-writing the Constitution in the process. How many know that the Second Amendment is NOT ABOUT GUNS but about the right of the MILITIA to carry weapons in order to defend the nation against outside forces? Florida is doing the right thing, but one can expect the NRA to put tremendous pressure on the legislators and the governor to revisit the law — or face the consequences, including the loss of office. They know how to push buttons: that much we know.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thank you, Hugh! Yes, the NRA knows the buttons to push and how to push them for maximum effect. And we elect people who are mesmerized by the shiny things the NRA wave in their faces. One commentor … I removed the comment for its very offensiveness … said to me that the right to own any type of gun is “a God-given right”! WHAT??? Seriously? Is there anywhere in the Bible, the Quran, or any other religious text that even mentions ‘guns’? I think not. And when do our legislators consider the value of a human life? This just makes me so angry, so sick. It never ends. The Founding Fathers would be horrified to see the way the 2nd Amendment has been abused and twisted.


    • In that case, I think the word ‘frivolous’ fits fairly well, for one generally expects coffee to be served hot, and would take the appropriate precautions, especially while driving. Suits like this lead everybody to believe that if something isn’t going their way, and something goes wrong in their life, there must surely be somebody they can sue. However, I made only a passing reference, as my post was about the NRA suit.


  4. Can someone in the know please tell me what companies still support the NRA and the GOA, and who their sponsors are? It has been proven many times over, money talks, so why bother wasting time denouncing the Big Gun Lobbies when boycotting the sponsors of the companies who support them will do more damage far quicker than lawsuits.
    I mean, yes, if you can get individual states to pass some kind of legislation, go that route too. I just don’t think there are enough states out there to do enough through legal processes.
    Attack them where it hurts, in their POCKETBOOKS, and PROFIT STATEMENTS!
    YOU, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, CAN DO THAT. And we of other nations can help, but we have to know who…

    Liked by 1 person

    • As far as I know, FedEx is the only major company that has not withdrawn support from the NRA. Now, I don’t know about the GOA, but will look into it when I can and let you know. You okay? I couldn’t get onto your blog …


  5. Thank you for motivating me to write a new essay for my blog!

    More Inaccurate Crap from Another Mouthpiece for Banning Guns.
    Posted on March 12, 2018, by JAMES A SINGER “Homo homini lupus”

    “In her essay entitled, “NRA Decides Constitutionality???,” Jill Dennison, a.k.a. “Filosofa’s Word,” she, like all the other anti-gun proponents, is light on facts and heavy on the propaganda. Paul Joseph Goebbels would be proud.

    I Swear to God, woman, that Mainstream Media and the anti-gun left messages are being “beamed” right into your head. You need to tighten down the tin-foil. Seriously, reading your screech is going to give me a brain tumor. Let us address your anti-gun propaganda piece beginning with this, the first of many ignorant assertions:

    ” The NRA had, obviously, been on a long leash, waiting and knowing the moment was coming, for they filed their suit only one hour after Governor Scott signed the bill into law. Since when does a lobbyist group have the right to write the laws in this nation? Since when does the NRA decide constitutionality??? Since when is the NRA the Supreme Law of the Land?”

    Do you not know how laws come about or who writes the laws of this nation? Perhaps you should Google the old “School House Rock” video from the 70’s to educate yourself. The NRA doesn’t decide the Constitutionality of ANY issue. They, however, as ANY person or legal entity does, have the Right to challenge ANY law they feel INFRINGES on the Rights of all Americans not just its Five Million plus membership. The “Supreme Law of the Land,” IS the Constitution which is being violated by the State of Florida. Nice attempt at your ad hominem attack against over Five Million Americans.

    ” The NRA claims “We filed a lawsuit against the state for violating the constitutional rights of 18- to 21-year-olds.” Seriously??? 18-21-year-olds have a constitutional right to murder? To buy and carry, concealed, a weapon that can cause mass destruction and take as many as 400 lives in a single 60-second minute? That’s right, people … the gun the shooter in Parkland, Florida, used on 14 February was an AR-15, which can fire up to 400 rounds per minute. And we believe that the founding fathers intended children age 18 to be in control of one of these weapons???”

    The “law” does, in fact, violate the Rights of 18-20-year-old CITIZENS. The law is in contradiction to Federal law and engages in age discrimination under the 14th Amendment of the Bill of Rights. Also, an entire class of CITIZENS has had their Rights taken from them WITHOUT “Due Process” as Guaranteed by the very same 14th Amendment.

    Weapons DO Not cause “mass destruction.” People violate the laws and commit crimes, not inanimate objects. Holding the NRA responsible for crimes committed by criminal individuals is akin to holding AAA responsible for drunk drivers. As to your next point, even as a veteran myself, I’ve NEVER seen 400 people killed in 60 seconds with an actual machine gun let alone an AR-15. Through military service and having been a law enforcement officer, I know, for a fact, that NO ONE can fire 400 rounds per minute (60 seconds) with an AR-15 or any other “assault-style” rifle, even if using standard 30 round magazines (idiots refer to “high-capacity” magazines). I’m a trained shooter and competitor who uses an AR platform all of the time. Even if one used 40 round magazines, with firing and magazine changes/reloading under stress, one couldn’t come close to a rate of fire approaching 400 rounds per minute -FACT.

    How convenient for you anti-gun crazies call an 18-year-old a “child.” Funny how they’re an ADULT when charged with ANY crime, can sign legally binding contracts, buy a car, buy a house, JOIN the military and put their asses on the line for YOUR Constitutional Rights…with a GUN! Now, you say they’re NOT mature enough to purchase a rifle or shotgun for self-defense of their homes or loved-ones? A bit hypocritical aren’t we?! Here’s an uncomfortable Truth for you: with the exception of Parkland, EVERY “mass shooting” was committed by a person OVER the age of 21. Almost all were over 25 years-of-age.

    Your non-critical thinking parroting continues…

    ” No, the NRA filed that suit because they were told by the people controlling their purse-strings to get rid of that law at all costs, for it might cost a few thousand sales to the gun industry. Might also save a few thousand lives, but hey … no big deal, right?”

    Show me ANY empirical evidence to support this statement…it’s okay, I’ll wait…

    As for your “save a few thousand lives…” Disingenuous to the point of LYING. After the Ten Year “assault weapons” ban put in place by the federal government, research done by private enterprise (Anti-gun groups), as well as the federal government’s own agencies PROVED that this ban did absolutely had NO effect on the rates of violent crime. Rifles of ALL types are used in less than 2% of all crimes involving a firearm and, in fact, so-called (by ignorant people), “assault style” weapons accounted for less than 1% of all violent crime. Pint-of-fact, of the last 96 “mass shootings” committed since 1972, only 6 were committed with an “assault-style weapon.”

    These idiotic attacks on Gun Rights are a “blessing” to the NRA and the next largest pro-gun group, the G.O.A. (Gun Owners of America). Since these attacks started in earnest, NRA membership is up by 4900%, Thank You!! Membership in the G.O.A. is also up markedly. As for gun sales, every time you whack-a-doodles start scream for gun control, gun sales go through the roof. Again, Thank You!

    “ Most gun owners do not belong to the NRA. The NRA actually represents a very small group of ordinary people. Their bigger concern is the manufacturers and sellers of guns. Just think, if every state in the nation passed even the watered-down law that Florida passed, the NRA would bankrupt itself filing lawsuits against every single state!”

    You’re correct, most gun-owners are not members of the NRA. But, MORE of us are now, part of the 4900% increase since the baseless and nonsensical attacks on the largest organizations working to preserve the Rights of ALL Americans to include you. There are well over Five Million members of the NRA, who is funded in part by the gun industry and donors from all walks of life who support the NRA’s Core Mission. These include people from every walk of life. There are another 1.3 plus members of the Gun Owners of America same dynamic in play here as well. The overwhelming majority of Americans DO NOT believe in any more restrictions on guns. and, by all estimates, there are about 85+ million gun owners in this country who shot NO ONE yesterday.

    Your problem is always the same. You use emotion and not facts, you use the talking points of the anti-gun lobby in order to drive an agenda. And, people like you are just emotional enough and dumb enough to believe what you are told to believe. One question for you, can you name one “mass shooter” who was a member of the NRA or GOA?? Go ahead. Research that one, once again, I’ll wait….

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mr. Singer, I was going to thank you for the free advertising, featuring me in your blog. But then, when I looked at several of your posts, I see that you have no readership, so the free advertising is falling on deaf ears. I told you before that I will not tolerate disrespect toward my readers and you crossed that line and I removed your comment to my reader. I also do not deserve your vitriol. I will thank you, in the future, to remain respectful or do not trouble yourself to visit this site. You are aware of my views on firearms and the 2nd Amendment, so if you visit here, you know what to expect and have no right to complain. Your comment above is outside the realm of civil discourse and respect.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Dear Mr. Singer, Thank you for the information that let’s us know there are 4900% more idiots in America than we previously thought, not to mention whatever number of other idiots joined the GOA, as you nicely told us. I do hope you, or someone you dearly love, gets their head blown off in the next mass shooting that we all know will be coming soon. Nothing personal, you understand, you (or your loved one) wouldn’t be a victim, but merely a statistic as in “400 people were gunned down at the Daytona 500 today in less than a minute by two AR-15 toting seniors who were upset that nobody tried to stop them from buying assault-type weapons even though they told the NRA and the GOA what they were going to use them for. After all, it was their right to buy the guns, and the ammunition for them. But, all is good, they paid with cold hard cash, and they waited the three days before they could pick up their purchases.
      So, whenever you are in a crowd, Mr. SInger, beware. Someone will want to prove you are wrong when you say it cannot be done, 400 in one minute. All it takes is a tiny adjustment, and a jam-packed crowd.


    • As a citizen not of the USA and thus an observer to this debate I would advise you this polemical response does not actually help your argument.
      You see, whereas to the outside observer it can be accepted there is a culture within the USA which has a more free wheeling approach to gun owner than seen in Europe (with the exception of Switzerland and Finland- both of which have higher than average rates of domestic homicide and suicide). The problem to us is the hostile attitude to any suggestion or argument restricting gun ownership.
      To engage in an argument where there is an emotional element it is necessary to marshal your facts and approach the subject in a cool and rational way, otherwise you simply cause the ‘wagons’ to be circled and the other side to be certain of their own beliefs. After 45 years in the UK public service and having to explain and discuss many strands of unpopular legislation I am firm in this belief. You may well have to deal with a point put initially in a hostile manner but your name calling and polemics do not solve the issue. You need to convince not brow beat. These are folk who are worried and distressed by loss of life. The Right to do this or that, is minor in comparison to an avoidable death.
      Personally I would be content if the vocal faction gun owning population campaigned for Responsible Ownership and a neighbourhood watch scheme to keep an eye on unstable folk who have access to guns. This is far more convincing than demanding a constitutional right, which is questionable as we are dealing with what is a well, regulated militia.
      I am therefore regret to advise you your past has only furthered my moral support for your fellow Americans who are campaigning for gun control.

      Liked by 1 person

      • You would like to start a civil discourse on gun ownership in America? Then please tell me why you feel you need to own a gun? There was a time in history when people lived far apart, and they felt the need to be able to protect themselves and the land they were stealing from its rightful inhabitants. But that time is no longer here. There are no hostiles to protect oneself from. The land grab is finished, and the Europeans won. There are no lone setlers who need to protect themselves.
        Meanwhile, in the overcrowded cities, the dangers have increased. There are too many poor people who can barely survive, and they have untold riches all around them that are being wasted while they starve. Who is to blame for the inner-city violence that abounds today? Not the poor, all they want is to be able to bring their families up in safe neighbourhoods, but they are not allowed into the safe neighbourhoods of the rich. And the so-called police services are not there to help the poor, but rather to keep the rich safer than they already are.
        And into this mix come guns manufactured right there in the USA. Guns that are oh so precious to people who no longer have need of them. But guns are not sold only to “law-abiding citizens with no need for them,” no, they are sold to anyone and everyone who can afford go pay for them, or who can otherwise come into possession of guns. And these people use guns as power, because they have no real power of their own. They are the forgotten people, the ones nobody cares if they live or die. But they care if they live or die. They are human beings, just like every other human being on this planet. Their lives are as important to them as yours is to you. Does that surprise you, Mr. SINGER? Their lives are as valuable as yours is. And it is time you learned that guns kill people. They may need help from people, but without a gun people with grievances cannot kill 50 people at a time, or even 17. Guns make that possible. YOU make that possible.

        Liked by 1 person

    • I am hoping that other states follow suit, preferably with even stronger laws. But … I’m now wondering if the whole Florida thing may have been something other than what we see? And, I’m not going to count on any states following suit except perhaps in New England and on the Pacific coast. Sigh. Why can’t anything be simple??? Always have to be looking for the ulterior motive, the underlying spider webs.


  6. I sincerely hope that if any other States listen to your request and follow suit that they go further than this rather watered down version and allow a longer period still for checks to take place before a purchase can be completed. Bump stocks must be banned but so must all AR15 type weapons, they’re not needed. Moving the buying age from 18 to 21 makes much more sense and if they’re not happy with that then maybe their parents and themselves should go to court to argue that. The NRA has no reason to act in loco parentis.Teachers should not be expected to carry guns in school much less use them. Call for a National Guard section to guard schools instead. Keep guns out of school altogether.
    I am still suspicious of the Governors motives and still think hr might have acted with the NRA’s agreement so that others will accept such a watered down agreement and think it a battle won. Is the Governor brave or just up for re-election soon?


    • I agree that it is a watered-down bill, or as Keith would say, “window dressing”. But I see it as a start. However, you may have brought up a valid point that I had not considered about Governor Scott and his motives! Something kept nagging at me as I wrote that piece … why would Scott give up his A+ rating with the NRA? And how did the NRA know exactly when the bill would be signed into law? So … I need to do a bit of digging … else wait and see what happens. But I wonder if Scott deserved my thumbs-up or a good swift kick in the patootie? I just don’t know.

      And yes, as it happens, Governor Scott IS up for re-election this year. Sigh. I am getting tired of tangled webs!

      xxx Cwtch xxx


    • A follow up to your comment and my response … actually, Governor Scott’s term expires in January, BUT … he is not running for governor again, but is planning a bid for a U.S. Senate seat. 🙄


  7. Surprisingly, the NRA may have a point! All those half-measures can only embolden the NRA and extend the status quo in perpetuity. The steps taken by Dicks, Walmart and Florida serve to pin the blame of all prior murders committed with legally acquired guns on minors. Why are those between the ages of 21 and 99 less likely to commit a crime with a gun? It’s time to take aim at the Second Amendment!


I would like to hear your opinion, so please comment if you feel so inclined.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s