National Rifle Association TV host says his request for North Korea to nuke California was a "joke"


Well that is a huge difference in pay load. No point in sending a rocket here with out a nuke.

The article you link to says, “Pyongyang’s Musudan missile will eventually be able to reach Guam with a nuclear warhead. Experts think the KN-08 mobile missile may be able to place a small nuclear warhead on the West Coast of the U.S. by 2020”

They say they have a smaller sized nuke now - but then again Trump says his hands are normal sized.

But again, the US has hundreds of nukes currently pointed at it from Russia. While NK is a dystopian dictatorship - it wants to stay that way. They will continue to use their show of force to keep their people rallied for the cause. Kim isn’t a complete idiot. He knows if that were to happen it would end him one way or another.


And North Korea has had American nukes pointed at it for sixty years. Plus the living memory of American carpet bombing, and American generals openly announcing their desire to use nuclear weapons.


North Korea presents no real threat to America. Unless America attacks North Korea.



From the same article:

Arms control analyst Joshua Pollack notes that as far back as 1999, an unclassified National Intelligence Council paper pegged the Taepodong-2 as being capable of delivering a several-hundred-pound warhead “anywhere in the United States.” Taepodong-2 has flown five times, the last two times successfully. In other words, North Korea likely has an operational ICBM right now, albeit one that may need careful preparation to reach its target.


ICBM is different to ICBM-with-nuke-warhead, though.

The claim that the Koreans have successfully miniaturised their nuke comes from the DIA (Michael Flynn’s old outfit). They’ve made that claim, falsely, before.


What @Wanderfound said. Miniature in the bomb world is like 500lb.

By comparison, Fat Man weighed over 10,000lbs, and Little Man was 9700lbs


By the way, this comment doesn’t really further the discussion. But I really would like to know what steps the NRA has taken to decrease gun violence in this country, which seems to be about 25 times that of other high-income countries.


Sight. Start a new thread if you really want to know.

Its rather insulting to say ones access to weapons means they condone violence. 80 million gun owners and only a fraction of a fraction use them to kill others.


I wasn’t insulting 80 million gun owners. I was questioning the actions of a group that, it seems to me, has done everything it can to block rational policies, like banning the sales of military grade automatic weapons – which seems to me to resonate with the joking request for NK to nuke California.

On this issue we inhabit different universes so I see no point in continuing the conversation.


Sigh. Legal “Military grade automatic weapons” are HEAVILY regulated, and extremely expensive. NO ONE is using them in crime.

Legal semi autos are much easier to get but account for very, very little crime. Hand guns account of most gun murders. So banning them would have almost no affect on crime.


The violence behind Stenchfield’s statement is typical of some of NRA board member Ted Nugent’s remarks, not to mention others (e.g., “The final war has begun,” Wayne R. LaPierre Jr.).

So actually the latest statement is not so surprising. I amend my comment above – the NRA with its statements often explicitly encourages violence, not just implicitly. In the last article referenced above, some NRA members are quoted as being appalled at some of these statements.


Ted Nugent is a nut and I honestly don’t know why they keep him around. Though his comments he makes on Fox news and where ever are his OWN. Not the NRA’s. Just like any large organization or news paper editorial, opinions expressed by one person do not necessarily reflect those of the organization.

Historically since the 70s it has been a rights organization, and has not condoned violence.

Your last example I agree with. It is the exception to the statement above. I don’t know who thought that would be a good idea but it wasn’t. Gun rights is a bipartisan topic. I was very disappointed when I saw that and I have been formulating a letter, like a real honest to got letter on real paper, to send them telling them so. You referencing this has rekindled my disgust and I will be finishing it up this weekend. Thanks.


Cripes. For everything I post HERE, I throw away at least three other comments.

And for most of the successful ones, I wind up editing them for clarity or sanity.


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.