Am I the only one who distrusts the NRA?

[jason41987]

i do not trust the NRA, nor will i pay into them, i believe them to be a detriment to the american gun owners. currently, we are forced to deal with multiple infringements on our second amendment rights and the NRA does nothing, past legislation has been used to strip decent americans of their second amendment rights and the foundation has been laid to do more, and the NRA does nothing

furthermore after sandy hook i listened to lapierre throw the first and fourth amendments under the bus by placing blame on video games and television (protected under first amendment freedom of expression) and mental health (which would require unlawful acquisition of medical records and a database of such in order to enforce.. this tells me the NRA doesnt REALLY care about our constitution, and leads me to believe their best interests are in whats best for gun manufacturers and not the american people

the 1968 gun control act was allowed to pass restricting felons from owning guns, but not all felons are violent, not all felons are used guns and not all felons are a risk of such, a felon for the most part is anyone whos spent 1 day over 1 year in prison, and not all felons have even spent that much time in prison, are they not free american citizens upon their release? they get their other constitutional rights back, but theres a bias here thats unfair to them..

but since then after that door has been opened people have been getting denied their second amendment rights based on misdemeanors, and the list of misdemeanors is growing, at some point legislation will probably be passed to restrict people with ANY misdemeanor because this is the slippery slope we've allowed them to put us on, that we entrusted the NRA to protect us from and theyve done NOTHING to repeal these anti-constitutional rights

why i think the NRA is particularly dangerous to american gun owners is how many gun owners believe theyre our best chance, that we need lobbyists to protect a RIGHT the government has no right nor authority to strip from us to begin with, and this blind faith in this organization gives them billions of dollars we could use on lawyers that will do the right job, that will work for our best interests, and we put that faith in this organization to protect us that we assume theyve actually done their best when theyve failed, or do what they often do and "compromise"

the best thing i can compare this to is that the NAACP does about as much good for the black community (using, manipulating, and pretending to care as they made millions) as the NRA does to the gun community which is doing the exact same thing to us

now i know im going to be attacked for this by people who truly believe someone is looking out for us, i know some people dont want to believe any of this, but i truly hope that doesnt include everyone here, i hope im not the only one with reason to distrust them

 

[Creature]

You're free to think of the NRA any way you want. And you are free to tell anyone who will listen how you feel about the NRA. Just as you are free not to join or donate to the NRA.

Have a nice day.

 

[zxcvbob]

Okay, so the NRA sucks. What do you propose instead? Or are you just here to rant? (it was a good rant, btw, otherwise I would have called it whining)

 

[RPRNY]

I certainly neither trust nor believe LaPierre whom I view as an inept alarmist and detriment to the organization's objectives. The NAACP analogy is interesting and may bear further scrutiny, but while the NRA as an organization has made mistakes and errors on judgement and tactics, there is no question, in my mind, that it has indeed protected our 2nd Amendment rights from much worse infringement.

While gun manufacturers have a significant voice in the organization, recent disclosures have shown that the majority of NRA funding comes from the rank and file members, so the "manufacturer agenda" strikes me as a red herring".

Our system of government was designed by the Founding Fathers to promote and require compromise. Checks and Balances are extended to the way in which policy and laws are arrived at. Sometimes, the NRA has to make compromises that I don't like. That is a political reality, just as sometimes they are victorious in requiring the Left to adhere to the Constitution.

I don't trust any political organization. None should be trusted. But I recognize that NRA is effective in protecting my 2A rights. Other 2A organizations have a role to play as well, in part keeping the NRA honest and focused. But united we stand, divided we fall.

 

[Kingcreek]

Where would we be today if the NRA had been silent for the past 10, 20, or 30 years?
Sometimes I think they lose focus or go a little overboard, but I support them and I'm glad we have them. They fight for all of us gun owners, those that belong and support and also those that just whine.

 

[savanahsdad]

hummm,,, they helped with the recalls in Colorado. and got two anti gun guy recalled and out of office , , they were a big help here in Wisconsin when the left tried to get Gov. Walker recalled, and we now have CCW and a long list of repealed gun laws , the NRA is trying to get it so 18 year olds can buy handguns, they are also helping push cross-bow hunting here in WI, , they seem to be the only source for armed citizens (8 this month) helping us show the anti-gun people that guns save lives every day,

 

[Buzznrose]

NRA isn't perfect, but they are the best front-line organization we've got for protecting the 2nd Amendment.

LaPierre needs to stop talking in public, though. He's NOT a good speaker, and always comes across as either whiny, cranky, angry, or just a baby.

He makes great points, and I'm on his side, but when he puts emotion in his delivers, he irritates me as much as Chris Matthews.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

So we just this year faced a gun control push where the Second Amendment Foundation was supporting gun control and GOA's A+ "Most Important Election of 2004" Senator was proposing his own gun control bill. The NRA managed to kill off this bill in the Senate, which is still controlled by the President's party - and the OP wants to rant about "What has the NRA done for me lately?"

You understand what is necessary to repeal legislation right? You must control the House, Senate, and Presidency and you must either maintain control of them by not sending your troops off on suicide legislation, or you must convince your troops to kill their political careers in order to advance your legislation (which is especially difficult since most politicians are selected specifically because of a reluctance to sacrifice their careers).

As much as I would like to lay the blame for lack of immediate repeal of gun control at the feet of the NRA, the truth is that even after Newton and the major gun control push, there are only around 5 million NRA members. There are millions of gun owners, who like you, don't pay a cent to support the NRA in any fashion; but benefit from what they do.

And the crazy thing is the that while the NRA does a great deal in the political arena (Have you seen NRA counsel Paul Clements (former Solicitor General of the United States) brief to the Supreme Court on the Texas case supporting the rights of 18-21yr olds to own firearms?), nobody seems to appreciate their real work - safety and education programs, range building programs, etc. If you have an unlimited Second Amendment right to own any kind of arm you want without regulation; but no place to shoot, what do you actually have?

Your rant is neither new, interesting or even particularly well thought out. It is the same nonsense that gets regurgitated into every gun forum in America on a semi-monthly basis.

 

[Telekinesis]

They fight for all of us gun owners, those that belong and support and also those that just whine.

I'm actually on the fence about the NRA because they don't seem to fight for all gun owners. The NFA group seems to get left out of the loop from time to time. Just a recent example was on the email update about the executive actions, the NRA wrote quite a few paragraphs on how the import ban was not affecting crime guns and only hurt collectors, and how they expected this move to backfire on the president, and how they were going to fight the actions as much as possible.

Then they wrote that they were not even going to comment about the NFA trust changes.

Considering that the idea behind the trust changes had been floated at least a year and a half before the executive actions, they had plenty of time to develop an opinion on the proposed change and should have been able to publish it with their thoughts on the other aspects of the executive actions. What that tells me is that they see the owners of NFA weapons as a group that they either don't care about, or one that's not worth fighting for.

On the other hand, I do think that because of their size it is impractical to start a competing organization, and it would be better to try to change the oronization from the inside - which means electing people to the board that better represent your views.



And for what it's worth, as much as I don't like their actions on the NFA front, I am a NRA member.

 

[zxcvbob]

Trying to veer the thread in a positive direction from it's current gripefest with a question I really have been wondering about:

I've been a regular member for years (and a SAF member), and my NRA membership is up for renewal in November. Is there any reason to upgrade to a life membership? Or is my money better spent with a regular membership because that frees up funds to send to NRA-ILA and SAF?

How would my life membership help the NRA, other than give them more money up front (that they *cannot* use for legislative action), and how does it help me? Thanks.

 

[jason41987]

wasn't it the nra who agreed to the instant background check, when most americans were full aware it was going to be used against decent law abiding citizens in the future?.. now with our government lying about NSA are we to believe theyre telling the truth that information supplied with those background checks isn't being recorded to compile a backdoor registration?

what would the NRA do if we threatened to pull all citizen funding from them and place it elsewhere in an organization that really does put the citizen above the corporation?.. would they suddenly kick themselves in gear?... many gun legislation has been defeated in court, such as the lifting of the DC and Chicago gun bans, but these were done by lawyers, not the NRA as it seemed the NRA really couldn't care less

do you see my point in that the blind faith in the nra leads many americans to believe these violations to the second amendment cant be challenged under the assumption that if they could be, the nra would have done it?.. and I will not take anything away from the good people of Colorado that stood up to and defeated the unlawful legislation placed upon their state and the people who were behind it... those were American PEOPLE that made the difference, and faith in the NRA has done little more than lead to complacency with the belief that our interests were being looked out for

 

[Sam1911]

I truly, deeply, and with all my heart wish we had a better, more effective, more politically dominant and commanding 2nd Amendment advocate force than the NRA.

...


But we don't. There isn't one. Never has been one. Not likely to ever be one.

So our options are the NRA or ... a huge vast silence occupied by nothing more than the chirps of a few political microbes (GOA, JFPO, NAGR, etc.) whos presence or absence makes no difference at all to national politics.

Complain away -- that's fine. Get involved and change the organization for the better -- that's awesome! Pretend there's some other path to success? That's delusional.

 

[bdickens]

No. It's you and every other tinfoil hat wearing Alex Jones devotee who listens to the BS spouted by every other two-bit "gun rights organization" that spends most of its time and energy badmouthing the NRA instead of actually defending the Second Amendment.

You see, unlike some of these other "gun rights organizations," the NRA is a bunch of realists who understand what it really takes to get legislation done and they have the clout to make things happen.

 

[jason41987]

alex jones?.. you mean the nutcase that thinks the rothschilds are reptiles from space?

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

wasn't it the nra who agreed to the instant background check, when most americans were full aware it was going to be used against decent law abiding citizens in the future?.. now with our government lying about NSA are we to believe theyre telling the truth that information supplied with those background checks isn't being recorded to compile a backdoor registration?

In 1994, the Brady Act passed. It was originally proposed in 1987; but the NRA spent millions of dollars fighting it and defeating it, until they were unable to do so in 1994 after the bill become a personal issue for President Clinton. The original Brady Act included a 5-day waiting period for handgun sales and required local LEOs to conduct background checks on firearms purchases. As a compromise to strip out the 5-day waiting period, the NRA proposed the establishment of NICS and Congress passed the final bill with NICS.

The NRA then funded cases seeking to overturn the Brady Act in 9 different states that culminated in the Supreme Court case Printz v. United States, which did not strike down the entire act; but struck down the portion of the act requiring law enforcement officials to conduct background checks.

many gun legislation has been defeated in court, such as the lifting of the DC and Chicago gun bans, but these were done by lawyers, not the NRA as it seemed the NRA really couldn't care less

Apparently you don't realize that the NRA was a plaintiff in McDonald v. Chicago and that their lawyer, Paul Clements, actually made oral arguments before the Supreme Court in that case. In fact, Clements arguably saved the day during the orals.

do you see my point in that the blind faith in the nra leads many americans to believe these violations to the second amendment cant be challenged under the assumption that if they could be, the nra would have done it?

You don't appear to have the first clue of what the NRA has done in the past or what unsuccessful challenges they have been involved in trying to overturn some of these laws, so how do you manage to reach the conclusion that blind faith in the NRA is the problem preventing these laws from being challenged?

Of course, the NRA isn't perfect. It is a group of 5 million people. I bet you can't get 100 people on THR to agree on most aspects of gun policy and regulation. The chance that NRA is going to please every one of its 5 million members (let alone those throwing rocks from the sidelines) all the time is zero. However, the flipside of that is the NRA is 5 million members - they are bigger than AARP, bigger than the NAACP, they are one of the oldest, strongest, and largest truly grassroots organizations in existence. When they DO speak, it is magnified by those 5 million members.

 

[BSA1]

The O.P.’s lack of capitalization, proper sentence structure and grammar speaks for itself as to his formal education level.

He also shows his lack of knowledge of the criminal code, what the definition of a felony crime is and the history of gun laws. Hence I agree with zxcvbob that the O.P. is merely ranting than presenting an informal, logical argument.

Jason41987 there are other gun organizations that may represent your beliefs better than the NRA.

 

[RandyRay41]

There is always an English major in every forum.

 

[tommy.duncan]

Quote from your post:
why i think the NRA is particularly dangerous to american gun owners is how many gun owners believe theyre our best chance, that we need lobbyists to protect a RIGHT the government has no right nor authority to strip from us to begin with

Tell that to the citizens in California, New York, Connecticut, Maryland, and the other states that have passed "b/s common sense gun control." I tried to get a CCW in Maryland, I carried large bank deposits and the MSP explained I didn't carry ENOUGH money to qualify for a concealed permit.

 

[jason41987]

and where was the NRA to defend them? where is the NRA helping them now?.. it wasn't worth the cost to the NRA to help people in these states as a couple pieces of b/s legislation wasn't a big enough threat to the profits of the manufactures

 

[BSA1]

No I am not a English major. I just went to school when students were expected to learn their three R's.

 

[Ashcons]

I donate to SAF, GOA, and NRA-ILA in equal amounts. It isn't like I'm throwing a ton of cash around, but the small guys have proactively spearheaded some big legal action (high risk, high reward) while NRA-ILA is more reactive in jumping in where it looks like their weight/money will produce a win - low risk activity. I see them as complementary organizations with the NRA taking the brunt of political mudslinging and twisting arms behind closed doors while SAF and GOA will hopefully grow in influence and continue to work on restoring our 2A rights.

NRA-ILA is the heavyweight in the political game while the others are idealists. With my money, I can be pragmatic and send it to an organization I may favor less, but know will probably show up to support our 2A rights in an arena where they can bend politicians' ears.

 

[BSA1]

Jason41987,

By rough count at least 71 MILLION Americans have had their gun rights restricted since the beginning of 2013 by States that passed anti gun laws.

Since the millions of gun owners in those States did not choose to organize, donate money and time to effectively prevent passage of these restrictive gun laws why is the NRA to blame?

 

[thanatopsis]

To those that want to talk about how the NRA does nothing in MD and other states that passed anti-gun laws you are wrong. The NRA spent considerable amounts of time and effort flooding every hearing in md on the gun laws with pro 2a supporters and made sure to get the base mobalized. Do you want to know why they don't talk up their efforts in other states? It is simple it doesnt bring money in to talk about their MD outreach in FL when there are things in FL that needs the NRA's attention. Secondly the NRA doesnt want to draw excessive attention from the anti-gun crowd than it already gets.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Sam1911]

and where was the NRA to defend them? where is the NRA helping them now?.. it wasn't worth the cost to the NRA to help people in these states as a couple pieces of b/s legislation wasn't a big enough threat to the profits of the manufactures

Well, as we've passed beyond opinion and into simply ignorant balderdash, I'm calling this one done.

I suggest taking the time to educate your self in the future. Knowing what you're talking about before expressing a really hot headed gust of wind is always a good idea.