NRA or NAGR or ?

[crazysquirrel]

If you were to join one of those organizations, which one and why/why not?

If there are other worthy organizations, please post them here and preferably something describing how they work and what their purpose is.

Thanks!

 

[Sam1911]

NRA is the 800 lb. gorilla in the room. It gets things done. Actually has a huge impact. Supporting NRA is (while a bitter pill for some people) actually advancing gun rights in the US.

GOA, NAGR, JPFO, and the other "little dogs" in the fight are perfectly fine to support as well, but they tend to be a bit closer to a few guys and a fax machine )) than a political powerhouse. Kind of nice to have some place for the REALLY rabid pro-gun extremists (like me!) to go and make some noise. It's always good if the primary gun-rights organization can seem at least a little "moderate" when compared to "those guys."

Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) might also be worth your consideration. They do in the Court system what NRA-ILA does in the Legislative branch. Some of the persons involved with SAF have taken a lot of heat from gun folks in the last few years, but it is impossible to deny the tremendous benefits they've brought.

 

[crazysquirrel]

Heat from the gun folks? Hmmm.... Whose toes were they stepping on? lol Any what about?

Best way IMHO to effect change in gun rights is to change the laws (on a national level) that clearly violate the 2nd, 9th, and 14th amendments. This is normally done through legislative action.

Save the courts for certain particulars that arise.

So I gather that the NRA is the best choice to support gun rights (or in reality PEOPLE'S rights since guns do not have rights)?

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Here is an open discussion between gunowners and NAGR's founder:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/12..._the_National_Association_for_Gun_Rights.html

It makes for interesting reading.

 

[Sam1911]

Heat from the gun folks? Hmmm.... Whose toes were they stepping on? lol Any what about?

Alan Gottlieb of SAF got himself really jacked up by getting involved with the Toomey-Manchin bill a couple years back. He really screwed up, both by supporting it and by making some statements about it which were pretty badly false while trying to get gun folks to support it. He really discredited his whole organization by that mistake. SAF is still an awesome force for good, but he put a big black stain on the group that will take a long time to wash away.

Best way IMHO to effect change in gun rights is to change the laws (on a national level) that clearly violate the 2nd, 9th, and 14th amendments. This is normally done through legislative action.

Hmmm. I'm not sure what the best way is. SAF has made a whole lot of progress, almost out of the clear blue, by attacking through the Judicial branch. And that's the most likely path to get any laws struck down as violating the Constitution. National legislative changes are great, but hard to get (for either side). State laws have a great impact on people, too, and a wave of state law improvements (or losses...) helps set the national path. We fight on all the fronts.

Please do join your state gun rights organization, if you haven't already!

So I gather that the NRA is the best choice to support gun rights (or in reality PEOPLE'S rights since guns do not have rights)?

Well, it's kind of the default. Get on board the NRA first, and if you have more money (and time and effort) to give beyond that, look into some of the other groups TOO.

 

[phil dirt]

NRA-ILA and Gun Owners of America

 

[hso]

I talked with Alan after the Toomey-Manchin fiasco both before and after it blew up in his face. He explained that the original agreement with Toomey and Manchin gave gun owners so much back that had been put in place to hurt us and gave the Antis little of substance. He also explained that the critical piece being the restoration of rights which has been blocked for years because of Sen. Schumer was originally agreed to go in an amend T-M to restore the rights restoration, but Schumer and the Democratic leadership broke their agreement with Gottlieb and his support for T-M went with it. It was a very controversial plan on his part and depended upon the whole package promised going into the final legislation while SAF continued their string of successful lawsuits blocking and reversing Anti legislation across the country. Here's the interview that was done with Gottlieb covering the mess. http://www.guns.com/2013/05/16/alan...wasnt-going-to-get-run-over-by-a-train-video/

I support the SAF and the NRA because they have a proven track record of success in the U.S. and are the best chance for gun owners.

 

[Mike J]

I am a NRA member as well as being a member of a state level pro-2A organization. I believe GOA, SAF, JPFO & others are worthwhile. I wouldn't give a penny to NAGR or any of their subsidiaries because I do not believe they are useful or effective. They do put out some pretty cool pictures that get posted on facebook but that is the only thing I have seen them be good at.

 

[AlexanderA]

The National Association of Gun Rights (NAGR) is an astroturf organization involved in more than a hint of financial scandal. Sen. Rand Paul's connection with it ended up hurting him.

 

[crazysquirrel]

Well, joining would be hard for me right now. A financial issue has arisen and I cannot even afford a gun this year.

Donating is out of the question right now too. Unless I win the lotto

But I can be a background supporter of sorts per se.

I am still not fully convinced the NRA is the best choice. My father has bad feelings about some of their work.

But I will keep an open mind.

Any idea on who they support for Prez? LOL

Or where I can find out so I don't tick anyone off?

 

[Shanghai McCoy]

The NRA is also a big supporter of the shooting sports programs as well as shooting education and gun safety programs. There is also, since you live in "The Free State", the Kansas State Rifle Association for local issues. I am a member of both.

 

[crazysquirrel]

I went to the site but it has some OLD information.

Like Brady opening an office a year ago to stop the gun rights.

And their statement that says you cannot conceal carry without a permit is also incorrect.

As of July 1.2015 ANYONE in Kansas, even visitors, assuming they are not barred, can CC without a permit in most places.

 

[benEzra]

Another article critical of NAGR; apparently, NAGR killed the effort to re-legalize 30-round magazines in Colorado, because gun owners couldn't get an outright repeal pushed through yet (NAGR killed a proposal to raise the limit from 15 to 30, hoping for an outright repeal someday and rejecting any incremental steps toward that goal). That was terrible strategy and hurts us nationwide, and a lot of Colorado residents were absolutely livid at that.

Apparently NAGR also opposed shall-issue concealed carry, on similar grounds; because it wasn't Vermont-style constitutional carry, they preferred to hold the line at may-issue and hope someday Vermont-style carry might spontaneously pass in Colorado with no incremental steps to get there. My understanding is that shall-issue CCW was passed in CO in spite of NAGR, not because of them.

Another Colorado article that made the rounds a while back implied that SoCon religious issues were as important to Brown et al as gun rights, and implied that Brown sabotaged some libertarian-leaning candidates due to their stances on religious issues. I can't vouch for that one way or another since I'm not in CO, but it's something I'd surely want to investigate and rule out out if I were considering sending them any money.

Edited to add: More info in an older THR thread here.

 

[Mike J]

I honestly have no use for Dudley Brown, NAGR, or any other organization that he has anything to do with. We have a very good state level organization here in GeorgiaCarry. NAGR subsidiary Georgia Gun Owners popped up a few years ago. I do not believe they have accomplished anything other than fleecing the gullible, the aforementioned facebook pictures being posted & putting out some cool bumper stickers. In my opinion there are other organizations that make better use of donations/member fees.

 

[zoom6zoom]

If you mention NAGR in a thread, someone who just registered on the board today will be along shortly to praise their great efforts.

 

[JohnKSa]

Why not join them both. Just be aware that NAGR apparently feels that its best strategy for survival is to denigrate the NRA only slightly less than it denigrates the antigunners. If you can tolerate that then you might as well support them both.

That said, there are other pro-gun organizations that are probably more productive than NAGR and less controversial. SAF and JFPO are probably two of the best.

See if your state has a gun rights organization, many of them do. My state's primary gun rights organization, the TSRA, does a LOT of good work both getting pro-gun legislation passed and blocking anti-gun legislation at the state level.

 

[Jim K]

There have been a number of those "pro 2A" groups, some of them small but OK, others simply a way to let the one or two "founders" pocket the money. Some, especially those with "sportsmen" in the name, have been fakes, set up by anti-gun groups or candidates to take gun owners' money while actually promoting the anti-gun cause. The fakes, the false flag groups, are easily spotted. Even the most extreme, frothing at the mouth, "ban guns" candidate will create a "gun owners for X" or "sportsmen for commonsense gun laws" or something similar. Don't fall for them.

But even the small groups divide our support. Some people, for reasons they believe are good, don't like the NRA. But a contribution to a one-man pro-gun group gets us nowhere. If he testifies before Congress, the antis know well that he has no clout, that he is mouthing off to hear himself talk; he is ignored or is the butt of jokes. One way some of those those "groups" get funds is to lie about the NRA, claiming it is a tool of the rich; part of a government conspiracy; working for the millionaire gun makers; covering up for or even part of organized crime; covering up for defective guns, which blow up and kill people by the millions, etc.

My take: Yes, the NRA can make mistakes and has done so. But they are the only real game in town on our side. If you won't join or contribute to them, that is your choice. But stop lying about them and talking trash to those of us who are members and support them.

Jim

 

[barnbwt]

Regardless their efficacy, tactics, or shadiness, NAGR is extremely bad about staying on-message when it comes to gun issues. Donate to them if you feel like backing gun rights + a whole raft of other random issues (calculated to drag in the largest number of donor dollars, if you're a cynic like me). NRA/GOA are probably among the best national gun groups at staying on topic, always. Which means your dollars start off undivided and most effective when it comes to promoting gun rights, regardless what the orgs then do with the cash.

TCB

 

[TimSr]

NRA and GOA are both very effective, and work well by complimenting each other's differences rather than bashing each other. GOA more closely represents my views, but I still have great respect and appreciation for the NRA.

I first saw NAGR on facebook with their ripped off logo that looks way to much like the NRA logo. They seem to be more interested in competing for the title of biggest and best pro-gun group than in fighting the real enemies of gun owners. By continuously bashing other pro gun groups, they do more harm than good. Unlike GOA, I see them as a desperate NRA wannabe that is unwilling to earn a reputation the old fashioned way, with a record of consistancy and achievment.

My advice to the OP is look at them all, and decide which makes most sense to you, but stay away from any pro gun group that bashes other pro gun groups.


I'll also put in a plug for state gun groups who have been a lot more effective for most of our more recent gains in concealed carry and defense. For example the Buckeye Firearms Association here in Ohio is responsible for most of the gains that directly affect me in my life.

 

[SKILCZ]

NRA is the most influential and largest, AFAIK. It also bears noting that donations to SAF are tax-deductible.

 

[Sav .250]

You asked a question about the NRA and your not even a member.

You say it`s a "money issue." If you cant save $25 for dues ,you are in bad shape. "I`m still not convinced the NRA is the best choice. " Convinced ?

For a guy who has nothing invested and is getting protected by the efforts of the NRA, Don`t feel bad cause there are a lot of folks like you.

 

[greenmtnguy]

I'm a long time NRA member and I also do support the GOA - those (2) groups I think offer the best "bang per buck" as far as keeping our voices heard, advancing the causes of responsible gun ownership and personal rights, and overseeing the politicians. They (specially the NRA) have an infrastructure that is 2nd to none, IMO.

Now, I also don't always agree with everything that Wayne Lapierre and company say, but for the vast majority of stuff, I mostly do - so these groups work better for me than other options, IMO.

 

[lilguy]

Been in the NRA for fourty years, just became an endowment member. SAF I got behind after Heller because of their supporting the many legal actions. The Illinois State Rifle Assoc.because they fight the battle at the state house.