Pro-gun ownership but not pro-NRA?

[Sam1911]

Well, the NRA did make a mistake here, there's no question.

They told Reagan to go ahead and sign FOPA and they would address Hughes at a later date.

That never happened.

You are completely right, of course. A hard, bitter compromise, but one that provides some very important benefits that we can appreciate every day.

But, I am still waiting for anyone to try to address Hughes and it's such a hot button it's untouchable for the forseeable future.

It does seem like an impossible hope -- that the Hughes Amendment would be repealed. But so much has happened for gun rights in the last few years that is truly unbelievable (in a VERY good way) that I've stopped being a skeptic.

Someday maybe the NPS will not have the authority to prohibit carrying weapons in National parks. Someday maybe the SCOTUS will rule definitively that the 2nd A. enumerates an individual right... HEY, wait! That's NOW! Who knows what other walls will fall?

The alternative, asking Reagan to veto the whole of FOPA, probably would have put us in a worse place than we are now, so it was a bad deal all the way around.

It's politics. You give some, you take some. We were manuvered into a situation where we were faced with a choice: accept this poison pill and capture the larger victory, or walk away with nothing. At the time (and even in light of history) it seemed like a worthwhile trade off. Accept a really lousy restriction that would affect one aspect of the rights of one very small segment of the shooting population (in 1986 VERY few gun folks cared two beans about owning Title II firearms -- times have changed) in exchange for some HUGE reforms that would benefit ALL gun owners every day.

A couple of years ago the NRA was faced with the same choice regarding another issue (that eludes me for the moment) and took the other option -- withdrawing support and killing the bill at the last minute rather than accepting that poison pill.

There are always chances to second-guess the decisions made in the moment, but in our representative style of goverment, no one side gets to dictate terms to the rest of society. Everything's a negotiation. Stack up a lot of small wins, balance them against a few losses along the way, and society is slowly moving in our preferred direction.

We're living in the light of that trend right now, IMHO.

-Sam

 

[HardShell]

... A couple of years ago the NRA was faced with the same choice regarding another issue (that eludes me for the moment) and took the other option -- withdrawing support and killing the bill at the last minute rather than accepting that poison pill...

Firearm industry lawsuit pre-emption.

The antis tried to add an AWB renewal to it, and the NRA sent out the word to kill it rather than have it pass with the amendment even though it was an extremely important legislative priority for them and the votes were there.

They then managed to pass it the following year without bad amendments.

 

[Sam1911]

Thanks HardShell, I could remember all the details, except what the bill was actually about! LOL!

-Sam

 

[texas bulldog]

i love how most of the anti-NRA sentiment in this thread is coming from people with single-digit posts. not that newbies can't contribute, but these are pretty obviously ASHA trolls.

 

[Mongo the Mutterer]

RKBA enthusiasts, who are the vast majority of members at this site, would do well to heed mongo the mutterer's advice.

Thank you sir.

 

[Fremmer]

Not from all of us with a low post count, Texas. NRA forever!

 

[twice barrel]

Never heard of AHSA before this thread.

24 carat native Texan too.

TB

 

[Dannix]

AHSA - these guys shotgunners who voted for 'change' type?

You're right about being stuck between a rock and a hard place. Either way is a tough route. Your right, there does seem to be a positive, albeit perhaps a temporal reactionary trend. Hey, maybe even someday ATF will be dissolved as unconstitutional. Probably when pigs fly, but I am grateful freedom hasn't eroded here as much as it has in other areas...London for instance.

 

[dpeticca]

It's the quality of the posts, not the quantity

 

[Eliot Smith]

I want to add a quick note about junk mail. Even if you couldn't stop the NRA from sending you junk mail (which, as was well noted, YOU CAN) that is no reason to not be a member. There are negatives to all organizations unless the organization consists of only you. But we must always focus on the essential role that the organization plays and not get caught up in unnecessary side issues like junk mail. My mother forwards me emails that I delete but I'm not going to stop loving her. If you feel the NRA is helping more than it is hurting progress in the RKBA movement, then you should support them regardless of the junk mail they send.

 

[CUTENAME]

A matter of numbers.

I will have to admit that my gripe on NRA is "they re not doing as much as 'I' think that they should be doing, for their size." IMHO. I bow low and exit stage left.