Conservative and liberal are labels and should be avoided. There are a lot of independent voters on this forum who are rec shooters and hunters.
+1.
I believe using pro-gun/2A and anti-gun/2A is better as there are many and growing number of Democrats/Liberals/Progressives/Independents/Women/Minorities who are gun owners and supporters of 2A.
Over the recent decades, faces of NRA members have shifted from primarily hunters/sports/recreational shooters. The new faces of NRA (probably the fastest growing segment of members) are likely those who became gun owners for self defense/protection and may never hunt or shoot matches. For many in this segment, fight for gun ownership is not a partisan issue rather personal rights issue.
To win the war against the anti-gun/2A crowd, NRA (the most powerful gun organization) MUST welcome and effectively represent new faces of NRA while reaching out to children/younger generation to become gun owners. We NEED NRA leadership who can accomplish this and many members have doubts/concerns with current leadership.
Bump-Fire Stocks ... I considered them to be a niche item owned by a small segment of shooters. It appears that both President Trump and myself made the same faulty assumption ... The NRA is catching a lot of flak for not coming out stronger against a Bump-Fire ban.
While I have been a supporter of NRA and conservative all of my life, I disagree with NRA's support for bump stock ban and was dismayed to see NRA's justification -
https://home.nra.org/joint-statement
"
Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."
NRA leadership needs to wake up and smell the coffee. While many members may not have owned bump stocks, members who owned bump stocks most likely felt NRA did not represent them and other members who did not own bump stocks (like me), shared the sentiment. Attack on any part of gun owners as a collective is an attack on the whole of gun owners and I fully expected NRA to fight the bump stock ban. For me, NRA's decision to support bump stock ban is a secondary symptom that something is wrong with the leadership at the top.
If NRA is willing to support slow erosion of gun rights/2A, then perhaps we do need change of leadership at NRA. Who knows, maybe that's what Oliver North tried to do. NRA leadership/board of directors should pause and reassess the mission of NRA and what their members expect NRA to do moving forward or they risk losing donations and membership.
Let me repeat that NRA is the most powerful gun organization and have done some great work in the past and gun owners need the NRA. But to be more effective in fighting the war against the anti-gun/2A crowd, we must be on the same page.