Gun Owners that Bash Pro-Rights (Pro-Gun) Organizations...

[justin 561]

I'm not a member of any pro-gun org. but I know bashing them is not going to solve anything, since they are doing a lot of work for us non-org gun owners. I still do my fair share, make it out to local NRA, and such events, write my letters, and hit gun polls. BUT it IS their right to voice their opinion on the subject.

 

[Cosmoline]

I don't think much of the NRA anymore. I don't dislike them, I just believe the movement has leap-frogged them. They seem to be little more than an arm of the GOP these days. What I hate most of all is their JUNK MAIL, which drives me insane and which in fact prompted me to quit several years ago. I HATE JUNK MAIL.

 

[jakemccoy]

Your poll is leading...a 'push poll'. It assumes that the NRA and SAF are pro rights groups.

The NRA's current stance is not 'pro rights', at least not as the Founders intended the right. Of course, I'll be branded as a radical, a revolutionary. Just like those outlandish guys...Jefferson, Madison...

I'll put on my dunce hat and sit in self imposed time out, no need to break out the ruler.

I think you're saying the NRA is anti-rights kinda or at least not fully pro-rights sorta.

That's confusing to put it mildly.

Here's how I see it:

NRA = Pro-Rights

SAF = Pro-Rights

Brady = Anti-Rights

Folks, it comes down to realizing that a pro-rights group doesn't revolve around you or me and then approaching the situation accordingly.

 

[Titus]

They seem to be little more than an arm of the GOP these days. What I hate most of all is their JUNK MAIL,

I can at least help you with half of that... vvvv

 

[brighamr]

I support all pro-gun groups, but that doesn't mean I wear an NRA flag or donate every extra cent I have to JPFO.

I have bashed certain groups, because frankly, no one is perfect and it is up to the supporters to let them know when and how they screw up. OTOH, I voice support when they do things right.

It's not "all or nothing" for me. Kind of like party affiliations. I vote republican sometimes, others I vote libertarian, and in some distinct times I will vote Democrat. I vote based on the candidate, not the party.

For pro-gun groups, I'll support the cause not the party.

 

[Gunnerpalace]

NRA = Pro-Rights

SAF = Pro-Rights

Brady = Anti-Rights

+1

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Recently, in the same court as Heller, it could fly.

One problem is that you can't get into the same court as Heller with a 922(o) case because you can't own a semi-automatic with more than 12 rounds (let alone a machinegun in D.C.).

Instead of being able to challenge just the 922(o) registration cut off; you would have to challenge the ability of the feds to regulate or ban machineguns at all - and right now, with this Court, that is an argument that is likely to get kicked back through your teeth.

The other (and in my mind safer) alternative is to lay the ground work in other circuits (incorporation, scrutiny) so that you can do a 922(o) challenge there. Chicago is the first step on that long road.

i oppose the NRA because they do not support black rifles, or "assault weapons".

Last time I looked, the NRA fought the first ban in 1994, sponsored legislation repealing that ban in 1996 (and every year after that), and then successfully stopped renewal of the ban in 2004 (going so far as to kill their own Protection in Lawful Commerce of Arms bill when it was amended to renew the ban). Heck, the American Rifleman has a EBR in every issue lately.

Would you mind explaining to me how you reconcile these actions (assuming you knew about them) with the comments you made in post #25?

where was the nra when the klinton ban was pushed through?

They were fighting it - presumably without the help of stalwarts such as yourself. Somehow having a dedicated anti-gun President whose party controlled both the House and the Senate was more than even the NRA could beat and they lost; but I fail to see how that means they supported it?

 

[ilbob]

I don't think much of the NRA anymore. I don't dislike them, I just believe the movement has leap-frogged them. They seem to be little more than an arm of the GOP these days

I think that is a fair criticism. OTOH, the vast majority of times, the Republican Party candidate is far more amenable to your gun rights than the Democratic Party candidate, and Republican party is far more gun friendly, overall.

Excerpt from 2004 GOP platform

We believe the Second Amendment and all of the rights guaranteed by it should enable law-abiding citizens throughout the country to own firearms in their homes for self-defense. To protect the rights and safety of law-abiding citizens, the Congress passed and President Bush signed the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act, which allows active and retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed guns in public while off-duty. We support efforts by the Administration and Congress to enhance the instant background check system for gun purchases and to ensure that records of lawful transactions are destroyed in a timely manner. We applaud Congressional Republicans for seeking to stop frivolous lawsuits against firearms manufacturers, which is a transparent attempt to deprive citizens of their Second Amendment rights. We oppose federal licensing of lawabiding gun owners and national gun registration as a violation of the Second Amendment and an invasion of privacy of honest citizens.

Not perfect. And I have never understood how granting former government employees a special privilege enhances anyone else's rights.

Contrast to 2004 Demo Platform

We will protect Americans' Second Amendment right to own firearms, and we will keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists by fighting gun crime, reauthorizing the assault weapons ban, and closing the gun show loophole, as President Bush proposed and failed to do.

Much, much worse.

 

[XDKingslayer]

I don't have a problem with someone not liking a particular 2A supporting group. There are many out there. Chose the one that fits you the best.

Much like handguns, cars, suits, shoes, politicians, etc...

 

[ProguninTN]

Groups

I really don't have gripes with wwners who bash organizations aren't necessarily the problem. They may not be members of a group, but that might not stop them from contacting legislators/doing things to promote the 2A on their own.

The people who are the problem are the "ownership is ok, but carry is not", "you don't hunt with an AR-15" or "concealed carry is great, open carry is bad" people.

1. Why should I be limited to bearing arms in my defense only in my own home ?
2. The Second Amendment is not about hunting, and after the EBR's are gone, your deer rifle is next on the ban and confiscate list.

3. Concealed Carry and Open Carry both have merits and demerits, so why doesn't everyone quit bashing each other and carry as he/she sees fit.
(Float your own boat so to speak.) I also don't see the word "concealed" in the Second Amendment.

 

[Sebastian the Ibis]

The NRA is a Political Group so it is impossible to make everyone happy. Does anyone out there seriously support every position of the Republican or Democratic Party? Or any other organization larger than your neighborhood association? I sincerely doubt it. You just can't satisfy everyone all of the time.

However, ignoring criticism is the surest way path to certain failure and the NRA would be wise to listen to their (potential) members. Their fund raising wags the dog and is pain in the backside.

 

[bogie]

Remember, campers... The Internet Ain't Real Life.

There are a LOT of folks posting on the internet in gun forums. Not all of them are "gun people," and not all of them have our best interests in mind. In fact, some of them are likely the opposite...

As for me? Well, I know folks, who I've met face to face. I'm pretty sure I'm on the side of the angels.

So, how 'bout the rest of y'all?