NRA VOTING MEMBERS:Whaddya think of this "Proposed Bylaw Change"?

.250Savage

Having read both sides of pro and con, Bill Davis and Charlton Heston, I have decided to vote against the idea, but still, Davis DOES bring up some valid points, even if he is a Neal Knox shill. The NRA DOES short-change and sell us out on some issues. During the last election, the hissing and spitting and fur-flying between Knox and the rest of the NRA turned me off so bad I didn't vote, both due to disgust that these people couldn't resolve their differences and work for the common good, and also because I wanted some time to think on the issue and see where the chips fell. The telling point for the proposed bylaw change, I think, was the fact that only ONE person could be elected from each state, which, as Heston pointed out, would force us to chose between several equally good candidates. Anyway, that's my take. What do all of you think?

Toyboy

I personally believe this an idea long over due. I suported it last year when it was first proposed. There seems to be no local representation in the board of directors and would remove the lock the nominating commitee has on the system. I believe the members have so little voice in the organization that something has to be done to reflect the 3 million voices. Besides, just what has Neal Knox done that betrayed gun owner rights?

Rembrandt

I voted against it....as for other members that do not feel represented, all they need to do is buy a life membership and they will have voting priviledges to make what ever change they wish.

Miss. Creant

We have a voice? Hell I am a life member and have no idea even how to go about voting. Is the ballot something they mail out every year or something?How often are there elections?

Iconoclast

Miss.Creant, if you are a life member, you (should!) receive a ballot, envelope & all kinds of electioneering propaganda in one of the winter issues of whichever magazine you receive with your membership. Reading it all is time-consuming and can be a bit cumbersome, but I figure it's at least as important to me as a Congressional election, since these people are the ones in the front lines of the fight.

Miss. Creant

I read my magazines from front to back but I do not pay attention to the inserts and advertisement crap. I guess I will look closer now.

redcedars

Guys I think the real problem is the nominating committee. It should be abolished. It is virtually impossible to get elected director wthout the nominating comittee endorsement, and if you are not a part of the La Pierre clique, you don't get nominated. Combined with their misuse of the magazine to promote themsielves, and their unwillingness to reveal their financial dealings with NRA, I think it is time for a breath of fresh air.redcedars

offeror

Yep. There should be a big white paper insert of pages in your NRA mag that says something like "You are a voting member -- this is your voting package." Hard to miss.

---

"The 2nd Amendment is about defense, not hunting. Long live the gun shows, and reasonable access to FFLs. Join the NRA -- I'm a Life Member."

Shootist3006

IMHO the bylaws change (as written) is a very bad idea. If it were to expand the Board by 50, to be elected by state, I might support it but in its present form it is a BAD idea.

---

Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.Semper Fidelis

.250Savage

Sacking the nominating committee sounds like a winner to me. Let the candidates stand (or fall) on their own merits.Any other suggestions? I'm all for letting some fresh air into the NRA.

nglitz

If Neal Knox is for it and the * is against it, no decision needed. I'm for it.The *'s "do not vote for" list is another good guideline for directors to vote for.