NRA Slams Gun Confiscations

[Waitone]

Better late than never

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/9/12/193358.shtml

NRA's Wayne LaPierre Slams Seizure of Guns in New Orleans

National Rifle Association (NRA) leader Wayne LaPierre slammed New Orleans authorities Monday for seizing legal firearms from lawful residents.

"What we’ve seen in Louisiana - the breakdown of law and order in the aftermath of disaster - is exactly the kind of situation where the Second Amendment was intended to allow citizens to protect themselves,” LaPierre said.

"When law enforcement isn’t available, Americans turn to the one right that protects all the others - the right to keep and bear arms,” LaPierre added. "This attempt to repeal the Second Amendment should be condemned.”

The New York Times reported last Thursday that no civilians in New Orleans will be allowed to have guns, quoting the superintendent of police that "only law enforcement are allowed to have weapons.”

A Louisiana state statute allows the chief law enforcement officer to "regulate possession” of firearms during declared emergencies. "But regulate doesn’t mean confiscate,” said Chris W. Cox, the NRA’s chief lobbyist.

"Authorities are using that statute to do what the looters and criminals could not: disarm the law-abiding citizens of New Orleans trying to protect their homes and families,” Cox said. "The NRA will not stand idly by while guns are confiscated from law-abiding people who’re trying to defend themselves. We’re exploring every legal option available to protect the rights of lawful people in New Orleans and we’re taking steps to overturn such laws in every state where they exist.”

"Local authorities in New Orleans are turning nature’s assault on human life into man’s assault on human rights,” LaPierre said. "Four million NRA members intend to stop this unconstitutional power grab.”

 

[rock jock]

Yeah, but everyone knows the NRA just capitulates in these situations.

 

[GunGoBoom]

The NRA will not stand idly by while guns are confiscated from law-abiding people who’re trying to defend themselves. We’re exploring every legal option available to protect the rights of lawful people in New Orleans and we’re taking steps to overturn such laws in every state where they exist.”

My butt! CNN filed a lawsuit against 1A infringements (or at least seriously threatened to do so), several days ago, and got RESULTS with that lawsuit (or threat). So instead of 'exploring', why don't you guys at NRA actually DO SOMETHING for the 2A infringement, like filing a lawsuit. Multiple ones, actually. YESTERDAY! CNN is ONE media outlet. The NRA is THE representative of gun owners (supposedly).

WHERE'S THE FRIGGIN LAWSUIT!?

 

[craig]

well, at least they said something. guess i'll keep my membership now.

 

[Sheldon J]

And CNN has more money then the NRA. The NRA must chose it's fights carefully, they want to win, and something as minor as a misplaced period can mess it all up. Yes they are not working faster than a speeding bullet but they are more powerful than a filibuster able to leap tall injustice in a single bound. Apparently mild mannered but they do fight for truth justice and the American way. Yah I know I watched too much TV as a kid.

 

[Taurus 66]

So instead of 'exploring', why don't you guys at NRA actually DO SOMETHING for the 2A infringement, like filing a lawsuit.

The NRA is a questionable organization. Filing any lawsuit against anything pro-gun control or firearms seizure, is unlikely. The NRA will take the path of least resistance each and every time, only taking in your annual membership fee, plus any additional contributions, to fill their bank accounts. Oh they'll be in the media spotlight during the most critical moments, but they know how to do "just enough" in order to "appease" or "pacify" the responsible gun owners. In analogy, you - the NRA member, are the mouse on the wheel forever chasing after the cheese square, but never quite getting it.

I will venture a guess: Charlton Heston has made more money as president of the NRA, than he ever did in his acting career. Eh, just a thought.

 

[GunGoBoom]

But CNN has to fight battles all the time against 1A censorship, like getting access to courtrooms and whatnot. This is a run of the mill thing for them.

But as for gun owners, and what the 2A is all about, THIS IS THE BIG ONE for gun owners and the NRA. They should have a war chest to end all war chests to whip out for this most egregious of imaginable possible scenarios! This is IT. If a period is in the wrong place, the judge can and will grant an amendment to their petition/complaint/motion/brief. I know; I'm a lawyer. It must be filed, and filed yesterday, knowing what we know about the video proof of confiscations in America, jack! People are probably dying as we speak to defend their fundamental right under the Constit.

THIS is precisely why we paid our dues, and why I paid $750 to them for life membership. And we still have lip service, but no lawsuit.

 

[publius]

Glad they're on the case.

 

[publius]

We’re exploring every legal option available to protect the rights of lawful people in New Orleans and we’re taking steps to overturn such laws in every state where they exist.

GunGoBoom,

WHICH lawsuit? I don't know what the emergency laws of my state actually say on this subject, much less what the laws of various other (more gungrabbing) states.

The situation in Nawlins has pointed out the need to protect our right to keep our weapons when we need them most - when the normal structure of government breaks down. No doubt many emergency laws have disarmament provisions, and the NRA is going after those. There might be many lawsuits. It could be a multi-front assault on these laws. It could take years. I'm not going to judge it a failure for at least a week or two.

 

[Fletchette]

Guys, the NRA is moving carefully.

Yes, the GOA and JFPO came out "against" the actions in New Orleans, but to what effect? I applaud these organizations for doing so, but they are simply too small and unknown to outsiders to have much effect.

The NRA may have "announced" its position a few days later than the smaller, more nimble organizations, but it will pack more of a punch. Let's face it - large organizations simply have a bureaucratic momentum that precludes instant responses to events like Katrina.

Consider the communications that went on behind the scenes. While the smaller organizations could simply make announcements, the NRA was collecting evidence (not heresay) and starting the construction of the necessary legal arguements for filing lawsuits. That takes time.

Don't misunderstand me, the GOA and JFPO are excellent organizations and they do all they can do for the cause. But to abandon the NRA and choose only to support these smaller organizations is a recipe for disaster. Why not support both?

 

[bjbarron]

Bull...The NRA has dropped the ball for years. I really don't think they'll do anything but squawk a bit. They are a political organization...which means compromise. How many times have we seen the NRA ignore some awful legislation until they were pushed by grassroots organizations.

I gave up on them years ago (after their awful showing leading up to the AWB) and eventually joined the GOA instead. I don't get a pretty magazine from them, but they fight....and they don't compromise. Tell me it was the NRA that got over 20 more states with new CCW laws in the past 20 years...hardly.

We've had enough. The creeping climate of gun control is what allows them to do what they did in NO and figure they can get away with it.

"Hey, it was an emergency, that's the only reason they took my guns, right? I'll get'em back, won't I? After all, there's troopers everywhere, I'm safe, ain't I?"

 

[JohnBT]

"Charlton Heston has made more money as president of the NRA, than he ever did in his acting career."

That's just plain ignorant.

Here is what he made for just 3 of his 102 movie roles since 1941. Throw in a couple of his bigger movies like Ben-Hur (1959, Best Actor in a Leading Role
Charlton Heston) and The Ten Commandments and the numbers go up in a hurry. And I'd bet he didn't do the Planet of the Apes flicks for peanuts either.

The Buccaneer (1958) $250,000
Touch of Evil (1958) 7.5% of the gross
Julius Caesar (1950) $50/week


John

"The NRA may have "announced" its position a few days later than the smaller, more nimble organizations, but it will pack more of a punch."

Don't bother with facts, their minds are made up.

 

[Taurus 66]

"Charlton Heston has made more money as president of the NRA, than he ever did in his acting career."

That's just plain ignorant.

JohnBT, I would of never expected this from you. It was a guess, then I finished it with, "Eh, just a thought." I did this so viewers would know that I knew I could be way off. The last sentence was merely cynical humor. The right emoticon for this did not exist.

A little less sugar in your coffee should make things better. You might want to think about switching to decaf as well.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Oh they'll be in the media spotlight during the most critical moments, but they know how to do "just enough" in order to "appease" or "pacify" the responsible gun owners. In analogy, you - the NRA member, are the mouse on the wheel forever chasing after the cheese square, but never quite getting it.

I keep seeing this assertion; but I never see any facts in support of it. For those of you who have not read the charter of the NRA, the NRA itself does not actually do any lobbying. The dues you pay to that organization are used only for promoting safety and the shooting sports.

The two organizations that do all the lobbying are NRA-ILA and NRA-PVC and both rely entirely on voluntarily donations over and above your NRA membership fees.

The two lobbying groups took in something less than $2 million in 2001-2002 according to Open Secrets.org. In contrast, the shooting sports and safety portion of the NRA takes in $25 or $35 x 3.5 million members.

So I'm wondering where those of you who believe the NRA is throwing fights just to rake in political donations get your ideas from and why do you figure there is more money in the political side than the safety side given the respective money each earns?

 

[rock jock]

I will venture a guess: Charlton Heston has made more money as president of the NRA, than he ever did in his acting career. Eh, just a thought.

Until you have even one iota of evidence that that is true, you should keep your spurious speculations to yourself.

Next time, think twice, post once.

 

[Taurus 66]

Until you have even one iota of evidence that that is true, you should keep your spurious speculations to yourself.

Next time, think twice, post once.

Hey Rock, I'm not your 'busee boy, and I'm not your front step!!! Once said, it's already taken care of with that person over the issue. Again said is another joining in and is uncalled for. I brought it up *as humor and you had plenty of time to realize this between my last post and yours.

* - Notice the underlined

Until you have even one iota of evidence that that is true, you should keep your spurious speculations to yourself.

Have you ever heard of the First Amendment??

 

[rick_reno]

I don't blame the NRA for taking their time - remember - there were (maybe they're still there) roaming gangs of armed thugs operating in NO causing lots of mayhem. I haven't seen the talking heads covering gun confiscation, but I'd bet it's all about disarming the gangs. I wouldn't want the NRA to jump on the bandwagon and have it reported on the 6pm news that "The NRA is fighting gun confiscation. Gangs continue to rule the streets."
That's not what we need.

 

[Desertdog]

Disaster Can’t Destroy Gun Rights

Disaster Can’t Destroy Gun Rights
http://www.nraila.org/CurrentLegislation/Read.aspx?ITNDrop=6466-N


Monday, September 12, 2005

National Rifle Association leader Wayne LaPierre slammed New Orleans authorities Monday for seizing legal firearms from lawful residents.

"What we’ve seen in Louisiana - the breakdown of law and order in the aftermath of disaster - is exactly the kind of situation where the Second Amendment was intended to allow citizens to protect themselves, " LaPierre said.

"When law enforcement isn’t available, Americans turn to the one right that protects all the others - the right to keep and bear arms," LaPierre said. "This attempt to repeal the Second Amendment should be condemned."

The New York Times reported last Thursday that no civilians in New Orleans will be allowed to have guns, quoting the superintendent of police that "only law enforcement are allowed to have weapons."

A Louisiana state statute allows the chief law enforcement officer to "regulate possession" of firearms during declared emergencies. "But regulate doesn’t mean confiscate," said Chris W. Cox, the NRA’s chief lobbyist.

"Authorities are using that statute to do what the looters and criminals could not: disarm the law-abiding citizens of New Orleans trying to protect their homes and families," Cox said.

"The NRA will not stand idly by while guns are confiscated from law-abiding people who’re trying to defend themselves," he said.

"We’re exploring every legal option available to protect the rights of lawful people in New Orleans," Cox said, "and we’re taking steps to overturn such laws in every state where they exist."

"Local authorities in New Orleans are turning nature’s assault on human life into man’s assault on human rights," LaPierre said. "Four million NRA members intend to stop this unconstitutional power grab."

 

[AZRickD]

Looks like somebuddy grew a pair.

Cool beans.

Rick

 

[Taurus 66]

So I'm wondering where those of you who believe the NRA is throwing fights just to rake in political donations get your ideas from and why do you figure there is more money in the political side than the safety side given the respective money each earns?

It's the way of the entire political structure BR! Everyone has to survive. Some find easier means of survival. For example, let's go religious for a moment: Minister Joel Olsteen makes a heck of a lot more money than I do annually (or do I need to provide documented proof here? lol).

The people give tithing to the church every day, and that's not a bad thing at all ..... but here it is ..... as the tithing builds wealth for the church, the people should get more for their tithings. Right? .. or does the bread in the basket continue to go for an air conditioned dog house, million dollar jewelry, etc?

Why should it be any different between an organization like the NRA and its members? We give so generously, yet all we get is 10% back, if we're lucky. We're told to be patient. Under this rule, the life of freedom, as life itself, has an expiration date. It is the complacency of our defenders who will move too slow on some issues, cave in on other more critical ones, and this is dissolving our second amendment rights.

I shouldn't even be having this conversation on line or elsewhere! There should be no such thing as a political attack threatening our RKBA.

 

[beerslurpy]

The numbers that speak loudest to me are:

NRA: 4 million+ members
GOA: 300k+ members

NRA political contributions 1997-2003:11 million
GOA political contributions 1997-2003: 18 million

I want a group that takes bold political action and has the courage to talk to gun owners without double speaking. Of course, GOA wouldnt be worth much without a large pool of gun owners to recruit from, so the NRA isnt worthless by any stretch of the word.

 

[beerslurpy]

The NRA is a questionable organization. Filing any lawsuit against anything pro-gun control or firearms seizure, is unlikely. The NRA will take the path of least resistance each and every time, only taking in your annual membership fee, plus any additional contributions, to fill their bank accounts. Oh they'll be in the media spotlight during the most critical moments, but they know how to do "just enough" in order to "appease" or "pacify" the responsible gun owners. In analogy, you - the NRA member, are the mouse on the wheel forever chasing after the cheese square, but never quite getting it.

It only seems lukewarm and halfhearted to us, but to most of america, it is as much as they can hear without thinking they are hearing crazyness.

Lets go over what Wayne said:
-when law and order breaks down, people need guns to protect themselves
-when cops arent there to protect you, you need guns to protect yourself
-some in government want to take your guns
-gun grabbers are using the disaster as an opportunity to enact their plan of gun confiscation
-the taking of guns is illegal and wrong
-the NRA is taking action to stop this and to prevent it from happening elsewhere, so people can protect themselves

Sounds just warm enough to please the gun owners, just cool enough to seem reasonable to the masses.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Taurus66 - my point was that people like to say that the NRA will never fight gun control because they profit from it; but that is obviously not true. The NRA makes over 60 times the money from the safety and shooting sports side that they do from the political side. Yet people here seem to be fond of the idea that the NRA conspires to sell-out their gun rights for that big $1.6 million a year that they get from lobbying.

Beerslurpy

The numbers that speak loudest to me are:

NRA: 4 million+ members
GOA: 300k+ members

NRA political contributions 1997-2003:11 million
GOA political contributions 1997-2003: 18 million

You aren't really comparing apples to apples though. The NRA and the GOA are organized under different tax structures. The NRA is a 501(c)3 corporation. It cannot be involved in lobbying without breaking federal law.* This is why the NRA can only use its member dues for promoting sports shooting and safety and has to form the NRA-ILA and NRA-PVC (501(c)4 corps) for lobbying and election work.

For lobbying and elections, the NRA has to rely on additional contributions from its 3.5 million members (the 4.2M was peak membership which was before the 2000 elections) over and above member dues to fund those efforts,

The GOA was formed under a different tax structure (501(c)4) so it can use its $30 worth of member dues to support lobbying. So that means it has an automatic base of $9 million a year to support lobbying efforts instead of having to rely on mass-mailings to churn up additional contributions.

*Just to refresh your memory, the original Million Mom March got destroyed when it was discovered that even though they were organized as a 501(c)3 corporation they had actually been involved in activities forbidden by federal law. The Brady Bunch basically assimilated the remnants of the MMM in order to save what was left.

It is also worth noting that from 1997-2000 the NRA was under continuous IRS investigation during the Clinton administration and had to dot every i and cross every t.

Here are some other numbers to consider as well. in 2000, the NRA-PVC and NRA-ILA spent $1.2 million on lobbyists. They hired six outside lobbying firms using 21 lobbyists in addition to funding their own in-house lobbying firm of 14 lobbyists.

GOA spent almost five times that amount of money on lobbyists; but all of it went to their five in-house lobbyists.

Now the number of lobbyists do not necessarily indicate their effectiveness and the five GOA lobbyists may well be worth the $5 million that GOA spent in 2000 on their efforts; but when you compare the money spent vs. number of lobbyists among RKBA groups, only CCRKBA spends more on their in-house lobbyists than GOA.

 

[beerslurpy]

Sorry I thought they were both 501c4's.

 

[publius]

NRA: 4 million+ members
GOA: 300k+ members

NRA political contributions 1997-2003:11 million
GOA political contributions 1997-2003: 18 million

You aren't really comparing apples to apples though.

Yeah! We wanna know the quantity and quality of congresscritters they actually bought with all that dough!