Carfield wrote:

But at least now we all know what the Lt Governor of Georgia is, and this guy might run for higher office soon!

He has already announced his intention to run for governor. Of course, that wouldn't have anything to do with his publicity-seeking attack here...

WarRI1 wrote:

Now we should turn our schools into armed fortresses instead of reforming archaic gun laws. You would think the 2nd amendment would up and disappear if something was changed. Ridiculous, a scare tactic and the way many members swallow this Bull also pisses people off. Them against us is not going to work as the body count continues to rise.

"Them against us" has always been the refuge of the scoundrel, attempting to appeal to the more feeble-minded lemmings. It seems to work on some.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Now that this is in the non-aviation forum...the more I think about this, the more I wonder if this could result in a criminal case against Casey Cagle, with his tweet basically admitting a crime...using his taxpayer-funded position to act as an agent of a private organization while acting as a government official to garner a special benefit for said private organization. That's extortion.

That would be appropriate. Payback is hell...

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Now that this is in the non-aviation forum...the more I think about this, the more I wonder if this could result in a criminal case against Casey Cagle, with his tweet basically admitting a crime...using his taxpayer-funded position to act as an agent of a private organization while acting as a government official to garner a special benefit for said private organization. That's extortion.

You understand what I am meaning much better. But I don't know the reality of what it "commits" if anything but it sure does sound improper.

Tugg

To paraphrase Stephen Colbert, it’s surprising that the NRA even wants anything to do with Delta given that they have an age requirement (to fly solo), require use of ID, enforce a minimum drinking age, require searches of your personal property, and enforce a whole other set of Liberty-limiting rules.

As a European there is something I don't understand here. After the tragic school shooting many Leftists started to attack the NRA. However, there are cities like Memphis, Oakland, Detroit... where violent crime rates are very high yet no one spoke of the NRA or gun ownership like they do today. Why is that?

Recently I was in Chicago and was told that there are certain areas to the south (and west) where you don't go because it's basically a war-zone. To me it seems like we are talking about the NRA just because media wants us to.

As for Delta, I doubt they would leave Atlanta. If they were to reduce flights by even 3% where would they move them to? New York? Minneapolis? Seattle? There is a reason why Atlanta grew this much. It's not easy to just pack your stuff and move.

FreequentFlier wrote:

DL didn't go after the NRA. It went after its 5 million individual members - many of whom are cops, firefighters, members of the military and so forth. What DL engaged in was collective punishment and it's disgusting. .

The NRA represents their members, ergo the members represent the the NRA. There is no collective punishment involved, unless you want to say that the NRA gives jack about their members and only implements its mass-murder enabling policies on the behest of some large donors.

You must be very, very, very much against any North Korea sanctions, i am surprised i didn´t read you say that yet, since that is just collective punishment and the North Koreans, different from NRA members have no say in their government policies.

best regards
Thomas

Holy crap is it hilarious to read the Frequentflier meltdown! They're not even human! Leave Britney alone!!! I should sue Delta for dehumanizaing me into not getting a discount all of my life.

Thankfully frequentflier didnt have any self respect to lose from this moronic display, so lets just all sit back and enjoy it .

Blerg wrote:

As a European there is something I don't understand here. After the tragic school shooting many Leftists started to attack the NRA. However, there are cities like Memphis, Oakland, Detroit... where violent crime rates are very high yet no one spoke of the NRA or gun ownership like they do today. Why is that?
.

There are 30,000 gun deaths per year, as a result of our gun policy, which is hand written by the NRA, whether it's a mass shooting, or the daily carnage of inner city murder, or endless suicides. The only reason you "think" we're suddenly talking about the NRA is because there was a high profile shooting recently. The issues are the same, and frankly far more important for reducing the 30,000 deaths than the exceedingly rare (though still insanely common) mass shootings which grab the headlines. If we talked about gun violence as often as it happens we'd be speaking about it with every breath, and we'd be numb to it. Spoilers! We're numb to it.

FreequentFlier wrote:

Considering many people (including several on this board) are regularly likening those 5 million individuals to "terrorists" and constantly dehumanizing them as if they are not even people,

Now you know what it's like to be a Muslim in the USA. Or a big scary transgender kid trying to pee in peace. Feels good doesn't it?

FreequentFlier wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

FreequentFlier wrote:

Seems like you guys really enjoyed DL's virtue signaling maneuvering when it happened.

Love it when the party of Jesus whines about virtue signaling without a hint of irony or self awareness. Thoughts 'n prayers 4 U!

You're talking to the wrong guy. I'm an agnostic.
.

The GOP also sets their virtue signaling gun to stun on: deficit hawks, pro lifers, and phoney baloney patriotism

enilria wrote:

evank516 wrote:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/georgia-lieutenant-governor-threatens-delta-after-it-cuts-ties-with-nra/ar-BBJCOYt?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=mailsignout

Pretty immature if you ask me. DL can cut ties with the NRA if they want, especially if it goes against Delta's company values. Just like the Duck Dynasty scandal with A&E, Delta is within their rights to do this in my opinion.

Actually companies need to stay out of politics irrelevant to their business. Delta lobbyists will be asking this same guy to sign a petition against the ME3 in a month or two probably. You don't waste political capital on these momentary political issues that don't impact the bottom line.

I guess Delta and other companies don't think this is momentary.

FreequentFlier wrote:

DL didn't go after the NRA. It went after its 5 million individual members - many of whom are cops, firefighters, members of the military and so forth. What DL engaged in was collective punishment and it's disgusting.

Some of these same people do/have done illegal things like drinking underage or smoking pot, is the state doing collective punishment to have these be illegal ?

Besides I'm sure they can get discounts as cops, soldiers etc., so no real harm there.

FreequentFlier wrote:

I hope the $50m dollars DL just lost is only the tip of the iceberg. DL should be made an example of, so other corporations learn the appropriate lessons from this.

Just so we're clear here, you are in favor of using the tax code to retaliate against someone's political beliefs?

Because I remember that being kind of a big outrage point when it was suspected that the IRS was giving extra scrutiny to right-wing groups. But IOKIYAR, I guess.

IPFreely wrote:

gatibosgru wrote:

Yeah very smart to threaten the largest private employer in the state. Will make him very popular come November.

Largest? I'm not even sure Delta is in the top five employers in Georgia. Coca-Cola, Home Depot, and Lockheed definitely employ more people.

Delta is #1 as of December 31st 2016.

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/sub ... oyers.html

Aesma wrote:

I guess Delta and other companies don't think this is momentary.

They think long term. And the NRAs butt-hurt reaction clearly shows they are right about severing ties to a fundamentalist organisation.

best regards
Thomas

FreequentFlier wrote:

DL will now likely lose a tax break that was only available to it. If you want to argue DL was retaliated against, feel free. But it looks like the favorable tax break DL received is no longer, so DL is now on an even playing field. If you want to call that retaliatory, then you're essentially arguing that DL is entitled to be subsidized by the state of Georgia in perpetuity at the expense of its competitors.

What are you talking about?? It wasn’t a Delta specific tax break. All airlines benefited from the tax break Delta just happened to be the largest beneficiary.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Now that this is in the non-aviation forum...the more I think about this, the more I wonder if this could result in a criminal case against Casey Cagle, with his tweet basically admitting a crime...using his taxpayer-funded position to act as an agent of a private organization while acting as a government official to garner a special benefit for said private organization. That's extortion.

He technically has a loophole. Just exactly what is the function of a Lt. Governor in GA? One could argue that he can coerce legislators to kill tax credits for Delta (and should it come to fruition, then he's already on the record for it) but technically speaking, his office has little power beyond serving as a Senate president. He can attempt to weasel out by saying that even though he spoke out, he didn't force or tell legislators how to vote.

WarRI1 wrote:

(And for the record I am not an NRA member and have no intention to join them. What I am is someone disgusted by the attempts of many, including many on this very board, to pretend as if 5 million people aren't even human. My contempt for those who engage in that kind of practice knows no bounds.)

I have not condemned, nor will not condemn all members, but you have to admit there are wacko's in the organization, being a member does not absolve one. The problem is guns, gun and more guns. The blanket denial of reality is what pisses people off. Guns in the form of weapons of war, are they really needed? No to me and many millions more. Having 5 million members does not give a license to corrupt and endanger. You suggest making any sensible reform and they go into combat mode, denying accusing and buying off politicians pisses people off. It is getting old, this blaming of anyone or anything except guns. Now we should turn our schools into armed fortresses instead of reforming archaic gun laws. You would think the 2nd amendment would up and disappear if something was changed. Ridiculous, a scare tactic and the way many members swallow this Bull also pisses people off. Them against us is not going to work as the body count continues to rise.

Of course some are whackos, especially when you are talking about 5 million people.

But DL decided to collectively punish all of them, for the actions that literally none of them.

You know who pulled the trigger? Cruz did. Ultimately he is responsible at the end of the day.

MaverickM11 wrote:

FreequentFlier wrote:

Considering many people (including several on this board) are regularly likening those 5 million individuals to "terrorists" and constantly dehumanizing them as if they are not even people,

Now you know what it's like to be a Muslim in the USA. Or a big scary transgender kid trying to pee in peace. Feels good doesn't it?

So you weren't bothered by those actions. You were just bothered by who was targeted by those actions. As long as the "right people" (in your view) are targeted by them, then go right ahead.

Got it.

Don't people ever get tired of this tribal bulls**t? I guess not.

Mir wrote:

FreequentFlier wrote:

I hope the $50m dollars DL just lost is only the tip of the iceberg. DL should be made an example of, so other corporations learn the appropriate lessons from this.

Just so we're clear here, you are in favor of using the tax code to retaliate against someone's political beliefs?

Because I remember that being kind of a big outrage point when it was suspected that the IRS was giving extra scrutiny to right-wing groups. But IOKIYAR, I guess.

No I'm not. But DL engages in cronyism and rent seeking behavior in Atlanta all the time. They are so far up the @$$ of many Atlanta politicians, I'm not shedding a tear here. And DL hasn't been punished for anything, unless you feel DL is entitled to favorable tax treatment in perpetuity. The actions of the AG just balance the playing field.

FreequentFlier wrote:

Of course some are whackos, especially when you are talking about 5 million people.

so, the NRA is already a tyranny with its members having no say about their policies and goals.

Got that.

best regards
Thomas

FlyingElvii wrote:

WaywardMemphian wrote:

Metjetceo wrote:

Delta has facilities all over the country and could stop hiring in ATL and hire in other locations without blinking an eye.
I agree very short sighted, and I bet cities like CVG would gladly give Delta incentives.

Every airline is going to go where incentives are.

That's easier said than done considering the massive operation at ATL, plus there's tons of obligations that the GoV't would hold them to. They have helped turn ATL into an economic powerhouse, others would swoop in and fill any void, heaven forbid it opened up more competition and lower fares for the locals.

So, Delta's PR move will now continue to cost them 40 million a year, that adds up over time. Hit them where it hurts and the state should push to open up another ATL airport like Silver Comet.

Delta has spent a TON of money, and lots of political clout over the last three decades to insure that no other airport is available for commercial service. The LAST thing they want is another Houston Hobby or Midway in their own back yard. PDK, Fulton County, or Cobb County would salivate at the jobs/cash that could bring in.

Southwest and the independents would fall all over themselves to get in, so fast that it will make your head spin.

Please remember that ATL is only what it is because of connecting traffic. Not sure that without connections companies would view ATL as an option. City politicians are corrupt and anti legitimate business, the city has no mass transit (significant traffic), cost of living is increasing... I am not sure that I agree with you regarding people lined up to take slots. In addition, I am not talking about cutting flights. They have two new types and could opt to base pilot bases, maintenance, etc elsewhere as these types come on line. You can keep your fortress as the airport and still transition $50M, $100M, etc. out of the market to other cities. More importantly the LT Gov literally just turned off any company that was considering ATL from coming there. I am sure Amazon laughed at his tweet.

If you visited the DL employee website you would note they are a very "progressive" aligned company. Progressives typically are not pro NRA for whatever reasons. I don't see this hurting Delta for more than a few weeks if that. If the LG wants to turn it from mole hill to mountain he does so at his own peril. The NRA is morally bankrupt these days and certainly nothing like it was 30 or 40 years ago.

I believe there was a DL family that lost a child in the most recent shooting in FL so that may have been a subtle factor as well.

You guys crack me up when Delta dies this kind of crap you give them a free pass saying that makes good business sense and they should do what ever they have at their disposal to get the upper hand but when someone else uses the same tactics against you beloved Delta you are all outraged. I am in no way a fan of the NRA and their practices but come one this is the same stuff you defend Delta for doing. SMH

777Mech wrote:

IPFreely wrote:

gatibosgru wrote:

Yeah very smart to threaten the largest private employer in the state. Will make him very popular come November.

Largest? I'm not even sure Delta is in the top five employers in Georgia. Coca-Cola, Home Depot, and Lockheed definitely employ more people.

Delta is #1 as of December 31st 2016.

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/sub ... oyers.html

You need to double check your facts they are 14th.
https://www.careerinfonet.org/oview6.as ... from=State

klm617 wrote:

You guys crack me up when Delta dies this kind of crap you give them a free pass saying that makes good business sense and they should do what ever they have at their disposal to get the upper hand but when someone else uses the same tactics against you beloved Delta you are all outraged. I am in no way a fan of the NRA and their practices but come one this is the same stuff you defend Delta for doing. SMH

I think you haven´t been following what happened:

Delta ends its business relationship between itself and the NRA
The local government punishes Delta for severing ties with the NRA

best regards
Thomas

klm617 wrote:

777Mech wrote:

IPFreely wrote:

Largest? I'm not even sure Delta is in the top five employers in Georgia. Coca-Cola, Home Depot, and Lockheed definitely employ more people.

Delta is #1 as of December 31st 2016.

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/sub ... oyers.html

You need to double check your facts they are 14th.
https://www.careerinfonet.org/oview6.as ... from=State

Do you really believe that number? There's no way an operation like DL's at Atlanta only employs 6,000 folks.

DL say their Worldwide workforce is over 80,000, so there's no way on Earth only 6,000 of them work in Atlanta. Your source is nonsense.
http://news.delta.com/corporate-stats-and-facts

klm617 wrote:

777Mech wrote:

IPFreely wrote:

Largest? I'm not even sure Delta is in the top five employers in Georgia. Coca-Cola, Home Depot, and Lockheed definitely employ more people.

Delta is #1 as of December 31st 2016.

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/sub ... oyers.html

You need to double check your facts they are 14th.
https://www.careerinfonet.org/oview6.as ... from=State

The number on that site is incorrect. They employ 4K at the airport alone.

klm617 wrote:

777Mech wrote:

IPFreely wrote:

Largest? I'm not even sure Delta is in the top five employers in Georgia. Coca-Cola, Home Depot, and Lockheed definitely employ more people.

Delta is #1 as of December 31st 2016.

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/sub ... oyers.html

You need to double check your facts they are 14th.
https://www.careerinfonet.org/oview6.as ... from=State

That looks like a reliable list, what with Emery University and Emory University both listed.

Are such publications typical of the ones that you get your "facts" from, klm617?

FreequentFlier wrote:

Is DL entitled to special tax breaks not available to other airlines?

It's a sales tax exemption on jet fuel.

How do you think the other airlines manage to fly out of ATL? Coal?

QuarkFly wrote:

Delta should not be getting special tax breaks in the first place. However, I doubt Georgia really wants to reduce Delta's presence in Atlanta...would be totally shortsighted.

Childish virtue-signaling has gone unchecked forever, glad to see a body take a stand against it, even if it is a corrupt (by definition) governmental body.

Re: DL taking their toys and moving to MSP--funny thing about 800-lb gorillas, they don't turn on a dime. It'll take fifteen years for DL to move their ATL hydra anywhere else. By then, this will be less than a footnote in history.

einsteinboricua wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Now that this is in the non-aviation forum...the more I think about this, the more I wonder if this could result in a criminal case against Casey Cagle, with his tweet basically admitting a crime...using his taxpayer-funded position to act as an agent of a private organization while acting as a government official to garner a special benefit for said private organization. That's extortion.

He technically has a loophole. Just exactly what is the function of a Lt. Governor in GA? One could argue that he can coerce legislators to kill tax credits for Delta (and should it come to fruition, then he's already on the record for it) but technically speaking, his office has little power beyond serving as a Senate president. He can attempt to weasel out by saying that even though he spoke out, he didn't force or tell legislators how to vote.

His tweet is forever though, and he controls what comes up for a vote in the Senate. That won't work as a defense.

Blerg wrote:

As a European there is something I don't understand here. After the tragic school shooting many Leftists started to attack the NRA. However, there are cities like Memphis, Oakland, Detroit... where violent crime rates are very high yet no one spoke of the NRA or gun ownership like they do today. Why is that?

Recently I was in Chicago and was told that there are certain areas to the south (and west) where you don't go because it's basically a war-zone. To me it seems like we are talking about the NRA just because media wants us to.

As for Delta, I doubt they would leave Atlanta. If they were to reduce flights by even 3% where would they move them to? New York? Minneapolis? Seattle? There is a reason why Atlanta grew this much. It's not easy to just pack your stuff and move.

Those areas are generally failures in law enforcement. You don't see that crime problem in the City of New York. As for where flights would move---think Orlando and Raleigh...Delta would pay a lot to expand its focus city in Raleigh. JFK would likely see major up-gauging of flights that aren't already on the A330-300. Other flights could move to Detroit.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Those areas are generally failures in law enforcement.

I think it's a bit more layered than that.

But a fine foil for Republicans to point at. They're never interested in trying to solve the actual problem, though, other than people need to work harder and not have abortions.

(Somehow the "work harder" solution never applies to the lower middle class white Trumpists in the Midwest.)

jetero wrote:

klm617 wrote:

777Mech wrote:

Delta is #1 as of December 31st 2016.
https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/sub ... oyers.html

You need to double check your facts they are 14th.
https://www.careerinfonet.org/oview6.as ... from=State

That looks like a reliable list, what with Emery University and Emory University both listed.
Are such publications typical of the ones that you get your "facts" from, klm617?

We all know klm617 doesn't believe in facts; he/she/it stated that previously.

Life in Narnia must leave plenty of spare time to spend posting nonsense on a.net...

I'm sure DL more concerned about their public image than the tax cut they never had.

jetero wrote:

How do you think the other airlines manage to fly out of ATL? Coal?

Shhh. Don't give them any ideas. Next thing you'll know is Trump will withhold all military contracts until Boeing/Lockheed/Northrop create aircraft that fly with beautiful, clean coal.

Georgia, led by Atlanta and great universities really cannot be called backward. Almost all lists of business friendly areas lists Atlanta a major competitor. Admittedly there is more than just Atlanta in the state, and some do compete for the Neanderthal Award. (apologies to any actual Neanderthals).

I find it most ironic that the Republican Party has been pushing like the devil to allow "People of Faith" to have the ability to discriminate and choose who is affiliated with them when it comes to matters like LGBTQ's, etc. Yet when DL does something that is well within their rights to do, the same conservatives in that backward state go bananas.

Very instructive, really.

BravoOne wrote:

If the LG wants to turn it from mole hill to mountain he does so at his own peril. The NRA is morally bankrupt these days and certainly nothing like it was 30 or 40 years ago. I believe there was a DL family that lost a child in the most recent shooting in FL so that may have been a subtle factor as well.

Exactly. When I joined the NRA, its primary objective was teaching gun safety and firearms responsibility. Along the way - beginning in the mid 70's, but even more so in the past two decades so - it discovered there was real money to be made in representing the interests of gun manufacturers, and pushing for guns - all types of guns - to be sold to virtually anyone, at any time. In doing so, they changed from a service organization to a lobbying group, claiming to represent their members but, in truth, pushing an agenda that is too often at odds with what the majority of their membership might believe.

I am no longer a member of the NRA, partly because I live out of the country most of the year, but mostly because I can no longer support their current objectives and inflammatory rhetoric. Indeed, most of my friends who were members no longer keep their memberships active. Nevertheless, I understand we are still counted among the claimed 5-million members; even deceased are among the "lifetime" membership rolls.

I pity those who still blindly follow the NRA's dogma; if you truly think any type of weapon, no matter what a menace it poses to society, should be made available because of some "Second Amendment" argument (and why stop at assault rifles? Why shouldn't a "well-regulated militia" be allowed hand grenades? Gatling guns?), the NRA is your team. If you are a reasonable, thinking individual, and realize the government is not coming to take away your sporting firearms, and if you understand there have to be sensible limitations on the types of weapons an individual should own... then the NRA isn't for you. Not any longer.

I prefer reasonable, thinking individuals.

klm617 wrote:

777Mech wrote:

IPFreely wrote:

Largest? I'm not even sure Delta is in the top five employers in Georgia. Coca-Cola, Home Depot, and Lockheed definitely employ more people.

Delta is #1 as of December 31st 2016.

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/sub ... oyers.html

You need to double check your facts they are 14th.
https://www.careerinfonet.org/oview6.as ... from=State

Double check my facts? I posted an article from a neutral, local website and yours can't even spell Emory right.

You need to sit back and ponder does that number posted on that website makes any sense. You really think it takes just 6,000 people to run the world's largest and most efficient hub in the world? Give me a break.

klm617 wrote:

777Mech wrote:

IPFreely wrote:

Largest? I'm not even sure Delta is in the top five employers in Georgia. Coca-Cola, Home Depot, and Lockheed definitely employ more people.

Delta is #1 as of December 31st 2016.

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/sub ... oyers.html

You need to double check your facts they are 14th.
https://www.careerinfonet.org/oview6.as ... from=State

14th seems about right. They would be higher if all of the jobs they’ve outsourced to 3rd party vendors are counted as Delta employees — and no doubt Delta counts them as “jobs provided by Delta” — but they are not Delta employees.

IPFreely wrote:

klm617 wrote:

777Mech wrote:

Delta is #1 as of December 31st 2016.

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/sub ... oyers.html

You need to double check your facts they are 14th.
https://www.careerinfonet.org/oview6.as ... from=State

14th seems about right. They would be higher if all of the jobs they’ve outsourced to 3rd party vendors are counted as Delta employees — and no doubt Delta counts them as “jobs provided by Delta” — but they are not Delta employees.

And who would those 25k+ employees be exactly? And what would they be doing?

Not pilots.
Not FAs.
Not TechOps.
Not ground handling.
Not HQ staff.

Sounds about wrong.

If it were me in the CEO chair, i would not cow tow i would play hardball, hell i would say either give us the tax breaks or i will relocate the headquarters to MSP.

Here is another list for you how many shall I provide Delta is 5th.

https://www.newsmax.com/fastfeatures/em ... id/645208/

Here is another list Delta not even in the top 5

https://livability.com/ga/business/geor ... -employers

klm617 wrote:

Here is another list for you how many shall I provide Delta is 5th.

https://www.newsmax.com/fastfeatures/em ... id/645208/

That's total employees nationwide, dunderhead.

Do you really think Aflac has 465,000 employees in Columbus, a CSA with a total population of 500,000?!

(Love it that you love newsmax!)

klm617 wrote:

Here is another list Delta not even in the top 5

https://livability.com/ga/business/geor ... -employers

That's not even a formal ranking.

Regardless, what's your point?

alfa164 wrote:

BravoOne wrote:

If the LG wants to turn it from mole hill to mountain he does so at his own peril. The NRA is morally bankrupt these days and certainly nothing like it was 30 or 40 years ago. I believe there was a DL family that lost a child in the most recent shooting in FL so that may have been a subtle factor as well.

Exactly. When I joined the NRA, its primary objective was teaching gun safety and firearms responsibility. Along the way - beginning in the mid 70's, but even more so in the past two decades so - it discovered there was real money to be made in representing the interests of gun manufacturers, and pushing for guns - all types of guns - to be sold to virtually anyone, at any time. In doing so, they changed from a service organization to a lobbying group, claiming to represent their members but, in truth, pushing an agenda that is too often at odds with what the majority of their membership might believe.

I am no longer a member of the NRA, partly because I live out of the country most of the year, but mostly because I can no longer support their current objectives and inflammatory rhetoric. Indeed, most of my friends who were members no longer keep their memberships active. Nevertheless, I understand we are still counted among the claimed 5-million members; even deceased are among the "lifetime" membership rolls.

I pity those who still blindly follow the NRA's dogma; if you truly think any type of weapon, no matter what a menace it poses to society, should be made available because of some "Second Amendment" argument (and why stop at assault rifles? Why shouldn't a "well-regulated militia" be allowed hand grenades? Gatling guns?), the NRA is your team. If you are a reasonable, thinking individual, and realize the government is not coming to take away your sporting firearms, and if you understand there have to be sensible limitations on the types of weapons an individual should own... then the NRA isn't for you. Not any longer.

I prefer reasonable, thinking individuals.

This is an amazing post and thank you for taking the time to write it. This folks, is about as common sense a post can get.

The 2nd amendemt was written in 1791. I am no gun buff but I believe when this amendment was written, there were only hand guns, no such thing as assault rifles that we now allow pretty much any civilain to own. Who here thinks that if assault rifles were around in 1791, the current wording of the 2nd amendment would exist today?

I for one hope that Delta sticks to its decision and does not go crawling back to the NRA.

alfa164 wrote:

BravoOne wrote:

If the LG wants to turn it from mole hill to mountain he does so at his own peril. The NRA is morally bankrupt these days and certainly nothing like it was 30 or 40 years ago. I believe there was a DL family that lost a child in the most recent shooting in FL so that may have been a subtle factor as well.

Exactly. When I joined the NRA, its primary objective was teaching gun safety and firearms responsibility. Along the way - beginning in the mid 70's, but even more so in the past two decades so - it discovered there was real money to be made in representing the interests of gun manufacturers, and pushing for guns - all types of guns - to be sold to virtually anyone, at any time. In doing so, they changed from a service organization to a lobbying group, claiming to represent their members but, in truth, pushing an agenda that is too often at odds with what the majority of their membership might believe.

I am no longer a member of the NRA, partly because I live out of the country most of the year, but mostly because I can no longer support their current objectives and inflammatory rhetoric. Indeed, most of my friends who were members no longer keep their memberships active. Nevertheless, I understand we are still counted among the claimed 5-million members; even deceased are among the "lifetime" membership rolls.

I pity those who still blindly follow the NRA's dogma; if you truly think any type of weapon, no matter what a menace it poses to society, should be made available because of some "Second Amendment" argument (and why stop at assault rifles? Why shouldn't a "well-regulated militia" be allowed hand grenades? Gatling guns?), the NRA is your team. If you are a reasonable, thinking individual, and realize the government is not coming to take away your sporting firearms, and if you understand there have to be sensible limitations on the types of weapons an individual should own... then the NRA isn't for you. Not any longer.

I prefer reasonable, thinking individuals.

Thank you for this great and on point post. Your words are filled with great wisdom and I couldn't agree more. It's a shame most people have been scared into thinking that the government wants to disarm our population.

jumbojet wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

BravoOne wrote:

If the LG wants to turn it from mole hill to mountain he does so at his own peril. The NRA is morally bankrupt these days and certainly nothing like it was 30 or 40 years ago. I believe there was a DL family that lost a child in the most recent shooting in FL so that may have been a subtle factor as well.

Exactly. When I joined the NRA, its primary objective was teaching gun safety and firearms responsibility. Along the way - beginning in the mid 70's, but even more so in the past two decades so - it discovered there was real money to be made in representing the interests of gun manufacturers, and pushing for guns - all types of guns - to be sold to virtually anyone, at any time. In doing so, they changed from a service organization to a lobbying group, claiming to represent their members but, in truth, pushing an agenda that is too often at odds with what the majority of their membership might believe.

I am no longer a member of the NRA, partly because I live out of the country most of the year, but mostly because I can no longer support their current objectives and inflammatory rhetoric. Indeed, most of my friends who were members no longer keep their memberships active. Nevertheless, I understand we are still counted among the claimed 5-million members; even deceased are among the "lifetime" membership rolls.

I pity those who still blindly follow the NRA's dogma; if you truly think any type of weapon, no matter what a menace it poses to society, should be made available because of some "Second Amendment" argument (and why stop at assault rifles? Why shouldn't a "well-regulated militia" be allowed hand grenades? Gatling guns?), the NRA is your team. If you are a reasonable, thinking individual, and realize the government is not coming to take away your sporting firearms, and if you understand there have to be sensible limitations on the types of weapons an individual should own... then the NRA isn't for you. Not any longer.

I prefer reasonable, thinking individuals.

This is an amazing post and thank you for taking the time to write it. This folks, is about as common sense a post can get.

The 2nd amendemt was written in 1791. I am no gun buff but I believe when this amendment was written, there were only hand guns, no such thing as assault rifles that we now allow pretty much any civilain to own. Who here thinks that if assault rifles were around in 1791, the current wording of the 2nd amendment would exist today?

I for one hope that Delta sticks to its decision and does not go crawling back to the NRA.

FreequentFlier wrote:

enilria wrote:

evank516 wrote:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/georgia-lieutenant-governor-threatens-delta-after-it-cuts-ties-with-nra/ar-BBJCOYt?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=mailsignout

Pretty immature if you ask me. DL can cut ties with the NRA if they want, especially if it goes against Delta's company values. Just like the Duck Dynasty scandal with A&E, Delta is within their rights to do this in my opinion.

Actually companies need to stay out of politics irrelevant to their business. Delta lobbyists will be asking this same guy to sign a petition against the ME3 in a month or two probably. You don't waste political capital on these momentary political issues that don't impact the bottom line.

Social and political issues definitely impact the bottom line and are very relevant to companies. In the age of social media, news can be spread across the country in mere seconds (and airlines have not gotten much positive PR recently ). You just need to look at Millennials and Generation Z, who are going to be flying Delta for years to come. This is a generation that is overwhelmingly progressive on social issues such as LGBT rights, the environment, gender discrimination, 2nd amendment, etc. There is a reason that DL sponsors LGBT rights events in countless cities and publishes articles about working to eliminate gender pay-gaps/offsetting carbon emissions. You can name a lot more companies supporting these issues than opposing them.

For Delta, they might risk some customers in the short-term by taking stands on the issues, but they are preparing for the long term. The majority of the demographic supporting traditionalist policies are older and therefore have less time left to do business with Delta than someone who is younger (and is more likely to support progressive issues). From a business perspective, it is important to attract these younger customers that are going to support DL for decades to come.

I don't disagree that DL conflicts itself on issues such as ME3 and Bombardier, but those are mostly economic issues. Those are separate issues and DL's public image not really defined by their positions on these issues. In all of these cases, DL is siding where they stand to make the most and loose the least amount of money. Seems like logical business moves to me.

jumbojet wrote:

The 2nd amendemt was written in 1791. I am no gun buff but I believe when this amendment was written, there were only hand guns, no such thing as assault rifles that we now allow pretty much any civilain to own. Who here thinks that if assault rifles were around in 1791, the current wording of the 2nd amendment would exist today?

At the time it was written even what we now call "handguns" were not very prevalent. The most common gun was a "long gun" used for hunting and for militia defense. They were not all that accurate and were loaded after each shot. While repeating arms were known of and being developed at the time of the writing of the constitution, they weer not at all common and had a high jam rate. Additionally rifling was not common either as the precision manufacturing needed for both barrel and shot were not commonly available. It wasn't until the latter part of the Industrial Revolution that these started to become more commonly available to the general public.

These two elements drastically changed firearms capability, use, and distribution. Being able to fire accurately in a quickly repeatable action (bolt action early on) was a huge jump in a firearms effectiveness. Mass production of these now precision manufactured arms reduced the cost to allow the general public to afford one. And efficient distribution took it to that last step allowing them to be delivered everywhere and allow anyone to own one.

Tugg

klm617 wrote:

Here is another list for you how many shall I provide Delta is 5th.

https://www.newsmax.com/fastfeatures/em ... id/645208/

Uhhh. This is from 2015, my source was from December 2016.

Your next post isn't even a formal ranking.

Just stop.