Pro-gun ownership but not pro-NRA?

Status
Not open for further replies.

cluttonfred

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
1,322
Location
World traveler
OK, I've got my fireproof undies on, so here goes.

I am for responsible gun ownership. I grew up around guns as my grandfather was a licensed dealer and avid collector. My particular interest is historic military firearms, and with my grandfather's help I have acquired several nice collectible guns (M1917 Enfield, M1 Garand, M1 Carbine) as well as a few .22s I've had for years.

I live and work overseas so I don't have much opportunity to shoot, but if I were living in the USA I would be shooting regularly and I would likely seek a CCW permit. I would also be interested in getting involved in competitive shooting of some kind, but that might be tough as I am not fond of the National Rifle Association.

I believe that the NRA has gone beyond its role as a non-profit, non-partisan organization to become everything that is bad about the lobbying system in the USA. I also believe that the inflammatory, confrontational style of the minority which seems to control the organization actually hurts, not helps, the cause of gun ownership.

I know that many, in fact most, THR members will disagree with this point of view, and I respect that. I would be interested to hear if there are any other members here who support responsible gun ownership but are turned off by the NRA.

Cheers,

Matthew
 
I Agree. The NRA has gone kind of loopy in my opinion. They're using stuff like the UN education agreement to scare up membership rather than fighting real issues like ammo control in CA. (Not that CA isn't a lost cause, but I saw nothing from them about it...)
 
OK, I've got my fireproof undies on, so here goes...

We're all friends here -- no need for that. :)


... if I were living in the USA I would be shooting regularly and I would likely seek a CCW permit...

Want to guess what organization is primarily responsible for the recent increase in the number of states with CCW laws? ;)


... I believe that the NRA has gone beyond its role as a non-profit, non-partisan organization to become everything that is bad about the lobbying system in the USA...

"The NRA" is not a non-profit organization at all and, in reality, is a very large organization with several related sub-groups.

The NRA Foundation is non-profit, and is truly non-partisan/humanitarian in nature -- all of the "feel-good" programs (Eddie Eagle, Refuse to Be A Victim, Safety Education, Range Development, Scouting Grants, Handicapped Shooting, etc.) are done by the Foundation.

The ILA is the lobbying arm and is solely responsible for those activities (and is the most influential lobbying group there is per capita membership -- AARP is stronger but has many more members). Membership dues are not spent on ILA activities, and donations made to ILA are not tax-deductable (like donations to the Foundation are).

There are other smaller/specific divisions that do other things as well...


... I also believe that the inflammatory, confrontational style of the minority which seems to control the organization actually hurts, not helps, the cause of gun ownership...

I find that comment interesting, since in EBR circles (where I usually roam) the most common criticisms I hear of the NRA is that it isn't confrontational enough, that it is run by "Fudds" who don't even care about the "black rifle crowd," or that they are too prone to compromise. :scrutiny:


I know that many, in fact most, THR members will disagree with this point of view, and I respect that.

Sounds good. :)


I would be interested to hear if there are any other members here who support responsible gun ownership but are turned off by the NRA...

Not here -- I like having my very own 800-pound gorilla in DC, even if I don't agree with their every action. :D

In the interest of full disclosure, I am an NRA Benefactor Life Member who also donates a lot of time each year raising funds for the Foundation and who has attended trainings and seminars at NRA HQ in Fairfax on occasion (even if you don't like the NRA, do yourself a favor and visit their National Firearms Museum if you are ever in the Fairfax area -- it's great!). My wife is also a Life Member, and we bought each of our children Life memberships for their 1st birthdays. :)

No hard feelings at all -- you are always entitled to your opinion. :)
 
The anti-gunners demonize the NRA. You've fallen for it.

The NRA isn't perfect, but it helps to recognize, in politics, who's an ally and who is not. You need not like your allies, but turning on them is counterproductive.

WRT lobbying, that's how our system works. Unfortunately, it only takes one side to determine the field of battle. The other side can choose not to fight by surrendering immediately, but if it wants to win, it has to fight. There really isn't a third path.

Without the "gun lobby", we'd have nothing but the anti-gun lobby, and that's all any politician would ever hear.
 
They're using stuff like the UN education agreement to scare up membership rather than fighting real issues like ammo control in CA. (Not that CA isn't a lost cause, but I saw nothing from them about it...)

Either you are not paying attention or you are being intentionally dishonest.

http://www.NRAILA.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?id=5176

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=12998

And quite frankly what do some of you expect NRA to do?

Have you looked at election numbers, especially those complaining about what the NRA does in California?

How exactly to you propose NRA to fix all the problems out there when your citizens keep reelecting the people they do?

Seriously, I think you misundertand who the NRA is. It's not some mystical organization that rides in and makes everything OK.

It's you, especially around election time.

I see these threads all the time about how NRA 'doesn't do enough'.

How about you post specifics about what you think they should do rather than just complain?
 
Blah Blah Blah... the NRA is Evil... Blah BLah Blah

More white noise.. If you dont like em, then dont give em money. Otherwise, who cares?
 
"rather than fighting real issues like ammo control in CA"

It's the NATIONAL Rifle Association, not the CALIFORNIA Rifle Association. The NRA is big, but not big enough to do everything for everybody at the state and local level.

Virginia has a group that has been very involved and successful in getting things done. A model organization if you will.

www.vcdl.org

John
Member www.vcdl.org
NRA Patron
 
I am the NRA. The NRA is a group of gun owners fighting to preserve our 2nd amendment rights and promote responsible gun ownership. I am the NRA,I wish you were too.
 
The NRA and NRA-ILA (Institute for legislative action) are not the same. The NRA or some division of the NRA handles competition, the NRA-ILA and NRA political victory fund handle politics, the NRA-ILA lobbies.

That said though, we need the NRA, including the NRA-ILA and NRA political victory fund.
 
I've got a sneaking suspicion that the poster defines "responsible gun ownership" a bit differently than the rest of us...

You might not like every detail about the NRA, but if you like gun rights, you'd better learn to get along... NRA is the only thing that is standing between Obama and your rights.
 
This OP is not trying to use THR as a place for partisan political discussions. My post was intended to test the waters and find out if there are others here who feel like I do. A few do, it seems, and many don't, as I expected.

I guess for me the issue is that distinction between the genuine non-profit insitution and the partisan political machine is easily blurred. Unfortunately, for me, it means that the non-profit institution which I would gladly support is tainted by the partisan attack dog which shares it's name.
 
I believe that the NRA has gone beyond its role as a non-profit, non-partisan organization to become everything that is bad about the lobbying system in the USA.

To some degree I agree with you... but I don't see it as anything but a necessity for the modern world. Don't get confused... the NRA is not some sort of run-of-the-mill charity. The gun-grabbing weasels have forced us to divert the NRA from its original focus, and turn it into a legal watch dog... perhaps even a legal pit fighter when needed. It is sad but true... and I am okay with it. When I give money to the NRA, I consider it to be a donation to a legal fund designed to defend my rights in the courts. The NRA does still have many other programs that I appreciate, but I also appreciate having a litigious pit bull on my side against the "enlightened" bunch.

Is it partisan?.. perhaps. But so is the gun-rights debate if you think about it.
 
You might not like every detail about the NRA, but if you like gun rights, you'd better learn to get along... NRA is the only thing that is standing between Obama and your rights.

And if you act now you can get a bag embroidered with the NRA logo at no additional charge!
 
Define "partisan".

If you mean that the NRA seems to work on the side of one party more often than the other, perhaps you can name any group with a particular political goal that doesn't -- at least when that goal is part of the platform of each party, one in favor, one opposed.
 
I support the NRA, while I hold my nose about some of the things they do - it's not like we have a whole lot of support from other groups out there.
 
The NRA is not partisan at all. They/we back the candidate based on his/her RECORD not their party. If opposing candidates have equally good rating then the incumbent is backed regardless of party affiliation. Same for seated officials. If Senator X of thebigbearlittlebear party proposes pro-gun legislation the NRA will support it. Political party plays no part in it.
 
This OP is not trying to use THR as a place for partisan political discussions. My post was intended to test the waters and find out if there are others here who feel like I do. A few do, it seems, and many don't, as I expected.

I guess for me the issue is that distinction between the genuine non-profit insitution and the partisan political machine is easily blurred. Unfortunately, for me, it means that the non-profit institution which I would gladly support is tainted by the partisan attack dog which shares it's name.

You keep throwing that word around, and it speaks volumes IMHO.

Yes, the NRA is non-partisan in that it supports candidates based upon their 2A stances.

But, yes, they have overwhelmingly endorsed one party's candidates more than the other's in recent years (much less so in the past). That has much more to do with the 2A stances of those individual candidates than it does with any partisan agenda, whether you'll accept that or not.

I was working on a gubernatorial campaign some years ago for a Rep. candidate trying to unseat a Dem. incumbant. My candidate was as pro-RKBA as one can be and very involved with the NRA for decades... but the NRA had to endorse the Dem. incumbent, also a pro-RKBA voter, by policy. (With two "equally" pro-RKBA candidates, they support the incumbent regardless of party affiliation.) I wasn't happy about it and did my share of yelling at the folks at HQ, only to be reminded that the NRA is a non-partisan organization.

;)


ETA: I see that as I was slowly (the only way I can do it :eek:) typing out my response I was beaten to the punch on this issue...
 
And if you act now you can get a bag embroidered with the NRA logo at no additional charge!

I'm actually not a member of the NRA, for two reasons: 1) I am not interested in getting their spam, and 2) I don't want them spending money sending me spam; doing so is wasting their money preaching to the choir.

I'd rather that they have every dollar possible available for litigation/lobbying/whatever other productive purpose is out there. Therefore I simply donate relatively small amounts of money regularly, using the "round up" function that several popular retailers have on their websites.
 
I did not join the NRA for several years, but came to what I think is the inescapable conclusion that there is no group more effective and visible in trying to hold anti-gun groups at bay than the NRA. It is easy to say, "Well I only participate in this-or-that shooting activity, so I'm OK without the NRA". My brother-in-law used to say that, then I noted that his gun collection included snub-nose revolvers, high-capacity pistols, a Mini-14 with folding stock and 30-round magazines, etc. I asked him just why he thought he did not need the NRA.

The NRA is confrontational and vocal. I suspect in a perfect world there is a better way. In the political world we actually do live in, however, that has become the norm and necessary.
 
I can understand the OP's disillusioned perspective on the NRA and I believe that it's due to people's very high expectations of what NRA can do. As said before, it's not some mystical organization that makes everything okay all of the time, but the NRA does work hard for our RKBA (as well as other groups like GOA). I am proud of my NRA membership, warts and all! :)
 
The NRA is not partisan at all. They/we back the candidate based on his/her RECORD not their party.

This is true... there are Dem's, Rep's, and Indy's with good NRA ratings. There are also Dem's, Rep's, and Indy's with very poor NRA ratings. It just depends on how the elected officials have voted in the past. You can't blame the NRA for the fact that the majority of the rabid anti's fall into one party.
 
Hardshell, I was dissapointed that the NRA endorsed Democrat Segalman in stead of Republican Riley in Alabama's governors race but I understood why. It was the only time I've voted against the NRA's endorsed candidate. Thankfully Riley won.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top