NRA Hypocrisy

[Sgt.Murtaugh]

Maybe you guys can help me with this one, but I have a friend who is anti-gun and he brought it to my attention that the NRA headquarters in VA doesn't allow visitors to carry guns on the premises - despite VA being a CCW state - but does allow the employees to carry guns. I researched this and found it to be true. He called them hypocrites and while I hate to agree with him, I couldn't think of a good counter argument

Care to take a stab at this?

Moderator Note: I asked the NRA and this is their reply. The short answer is, your buddy is lying.

Thank you for your inquiry to the National Firearms Museum.

If you are legal in Virginia, you are legal to carry concealed or open carry here in the museum galleries.
Please note that we do not permit any photography at this point in time.

National Firearms Museum

 

[CmdrSlander]

They might be worried about deranged antis trying to kill them...

It might also have something to do with the policy of the firm that they rent their headquarters from.

In general however it is hypocritical as all hell and they need to change it ASAP. NRA members should make a stink about it.

 

[psyopspec]

The point isn't whether they allow or deny the carry of guns on their property. The point is that they and everyone else get a choice in the matter when it concerns their own property, rather than the government making that choice for all of us.

 

[CmdrSlander]

The point isn't whether they allow or deny the carry of guns on their property. The point is that they and everyone else get a choice in the matter when it concerns their own property, rather than the government making that choice for all of us.

Agreed, but if the NRA wants the American people to trust the average citizen with a gun then they need to be willing to do the same on their property.

 

[BHP FAN]

''They might be worried about deranged antis trying to kill them...''

If I were an employee I'd be pretty happy with the arrangement.

 

[ljnowell]

Proof of this, or "just what a friend said?"

 

[taliv]

seriously? how did you verify it?

that is unbelievably hypocritical if true

 

[c4v3man]

That's a problem... but doesn't surprise me. While the NRA has the biggest stick in Washington, that doesn't mean they are perfect by any means.

 

[mbt2001]

The best they can say is that the NRA is hypocritical? There could be 10,000 reasons as to why they do not allow carry, quite honestly I don't give a darn about them. Supposing that it is true, and "doing research" doesn't count. Call them and ask point blank. If they say "NO, we will have you arrested" then advise that the anti's are making hay of this policy.

 

[M-Cameron]

Before everyone gets their knickers in a bunch...perhaps it might not be a bad idea to give them a call and verify they dont allow Conceal Carry and perhaps ask them why rather than sit around speculating.

 

[mbt2001]

Before everyone gets their knickers in a bunch...perhaps it might not be a bad idea to give them a call and verify they dont allow Conceal Carry and perhaps ask them why rather than sit around speculating.

I can't... I am too busy speculating!

 

[Sergei Mosin]

I don't recall it being posted last time I was there.

 

[Rembrandt]

First off the NRA owns the property, it also houses one of the most extensive collections of historical guns including full autos. For a number of security reasons I could understand the policy if it does exist.

 

[CmdrSlander]

It does make a certain kind of sense. The NRA campus could be considered a very high risk area for shooting attacks, as I hear antis talk about killing Wayne Lapierre or shooting all NRA members all the time, it is the singular target of their rage and confusion. One day I could easily envision a parent or relative of someone killed in a shooting, blinded by rage and grief, attempting to go out and take the NRA HQ staff with them. In the time it takes to determine that an armed guest is not a CHL holder but in fact a would be active shooter it could be too late. If they prohibited their employees from carrying then it would be super, ultra-hypocritical and even now it really is an ill-conceived policy.

 

[MErl]

Yawn.Another "lets find another reason to bash the NRA" thread .Old as the West Virginia mountains

Take me home! Country Roads.

In this case though, If True, there is a strong case for bashing. Advocates for CC everywhere that disallow it in their own facility are hard to take seriously.

 

[pharmer]

Probably has to do with insurance. If they have an "umbrella" policy with one of the big outfits, premiums can be affected by allowing carry by the "public." Joe

 

[mbt2001]

In this case though, If True, there is a strong case for bashing. Advocates for CC everywhere that disallow it in their own facility are hard to take seriously.

Context is king... You nor I know everything about their situation i.e. mandates / insurance / et cetera. If they have a museum on property and there is some arcane insurance / state / federal law regarding guns at museums or what-have-you.

 

[Creature]

This may be of interest.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/21/1172739/-I-Called-the-NRA-Today-Oh-Boy

This is grounds for a solid bashing.

 

[goon]

I am working on this now. Just "call the NRA and ask them" isn't turning out to be so easy. So far, I am getting the typical phone run-around.
And I am trying to do them a favor.

 

[tyeo098]

This may be of interest.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/21/1172739/-I-Called-the-NRA-Today-Oh-Boy

This is grounds for a solid bashing.

Did you see that poll on the bottom of the page?
Hardly unbiased news.

 

[Creature]

This needs to be corrected ASAP by the head honchos at the NRA or this could...nay, WILL...result in a serious media flogging.

Did you see that poll on the bottom of the page?
Hardly unbiased news.

Doesnt matter...if its true this will become a nightmare for the NRA

 

[M-Cameron]

This may be of interest.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/1...A-Today-Oh-Boy

This is grounds for a solid bashing.

seeing as:

1) its some guys blog of unknown authenticity.

2) the guy admitted to being anti-gun.....meaning its most likely biased.

3) assuming its true, he never bothered to ask why that was their policy.

ide say leave your bashing gloves in the closet until we have some more information.

 

[Phatty]

First off the NRA owns the property, it also houses one of the most extensive collections of historical guns including full autos. For a number of security reasons I could understand the policy if it does exist.

It does make a certain kind of sense. The NRA campus could be considered a very high risk area for shooting attacks

Flies in the face of the argument that you are only disarming law-abiding citizens that weren't going to cause any trouble in the first place. The criminals intent on committing a crime will simply ignore the policy.*

*Above argument does not apply if metal detectors and armed security at entrances.

 

[Creature]

ide say leave your bashing gloves in the closet until we have some more information.

When was the last time you saw the liberal media wait for their fact checkers to actually verify?

 

[LemmyCaution]

Are some of you trying to tell me that making NRA headquarters effectively a gun free zone is acceptable, but making a public school a GFZ is not? That the NRA's reasons are better than other people's reasons?

This policy, if true, is completely hypocritical, and totally undercuts the already badly formulated argument LaPierre has been loudly and publicly crowing about.

This is horrible.