In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

NRA could 'shut down forever,'

lt496lt496 Member Posts: 128
edited April 2019 in General Discussion
Well, yay! Not likely, but yay for the thought.

NRA could 'shut down forever,' group warns in fundraising letter

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/nra-could-shut-down-forever-group-warns-in-fundraising-letter-194322998.html

"In November, alarm bells started to ring about the National Rifle Association?s finances. At the time, the gun rights group was reportedly unable to afford coffee for its employees. At the time, the news was just another financial hit for the organization that had been suffering from declining revenues and membership dues.

Now, in a fundraising letter sent this month, Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre has warned that the NRA could shut down forever, blaming New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo."

More BS from Quisling HQ and Wayne La Pee Aire...the poor schmuck who makes over a million bucks yearly, selling out fundamental liberty and Amendment II.

Pffft.
"Freedom is not for the timid" III% BFYTW
«1

Comments

  • wpageabcwpageabc Member Posts: 8,968
    edited November -1
    Why would you say yay to that?
    "What is truth?'
  • 35 Whelen35 Whelen Member Posts: 15,200
    edited November -1
    Marketing gimmick at its finest, IMO. If he's blaming nobody but Cuomo for the possibility of it shutting down, it might be in his best interest to avoid any mirrors.
    An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.
  • lt496lt496 Member Posts: 128
    edited November -1
    wpageabc wrote:
    Why would you say yay to that?

    Umm, because the vaunted NRA has been in support of govt infringements of firearms since at least the 1920s. They have, historically and contemporaneously, partnered with govt to slow sell a vast array of gun control/infringements to trusting (and largely brainless) Americans for longer than any of us has trod this earth.

    If they went away, then we could focus on actual liberty and the essential fundamental liberty to keep and bear arms, without them framing a quisling and false paradigm and back-door dealing, lying to everyone and actually drafting gun control.

    Is this somehow new information?

    I continue to be amazed at the willful ignorance and abject cognitive dissonance displayed by my fellow citizens.
    "Freedom is not for the timid" III% BFYTW
  • wpageabcwpageabc Member Posts: 8,968
    edited November -1
    OK poser...
    So you are going to represent us to fight the power?
    "What is truth?'
  • chiefrchiefr Member Posts: 13,068 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Why don't you post your rant on Twitter or Facebook where it belongs.
  • mnrivrat48mnrivrat48 Member Posts: 1,715 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    There is one organization that the anti gunners always point out as their pro gun enemy. That is the NRA . That should tell you something.
    I have a great respect for all pro gun organizations that are fighting for our right. They all deserve our gratitude for what they do and what they accomplish for the gun owner. I am not going to micro mange any of them . They will either get my support via funding, or by expressing my gratitude for their existence. Those that stand and grumble about the NRA are not helping gun owners. Lead - follow - or get out of the way , stand and grumble will not accomplish anything good.

    Keith
  • lt496lt496 Member Posts: 128
    edited November -1
    Lol and a healthy snort.... For posting my assessment of the NRA and subsequently answering a members question directly I am now a 'poser' and should just go 'rant' on twitter or faceborg, so sayeth a couple 'new american' gun rights supporters and freedom warriors.

    I wonder if either will address the substance or just continue a display of cognitive dissonance?
    "Freedom is not for the timid" III% BFYTW
  • bullshotbullshot Member Posts: 13,285 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I also own a thesaurus.
    "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you"
  • yoshmysteryoshmyster Member Posts: 19,954 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I ain't gonna pay for Wayne and other suits to go to Africa to pop something on my dime. No more fancy Vaca for them and let them dust off the Mr. Coffee for that cup of Folgers.
  • dcon12dcon12 Member Posts: 31,644 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    lt496 wrote:
    Lol and a healthy snort.... For posting my assessment of the NRA and subsequently answering a members question directly I am now a 'poser' and should just go 'rant' on twitter or faceborg, so sayeth a couple 'new american' gun rights supporters and freedom warriors.

    I wonder if either will address the substance or just continue a display of cognitive dissonance?




    It is like you never left! Don
  • mnrivrat48mnrivrat48 Member Posts: 1,715 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    " a couple 'new american' gun rights supporters and freedom warriors."

    As far as being new it is more likely you were still a gleam in you pappy's eye when I first joined the NRA. Just out of curiosity what organization are you helping fund that you think is doing a much better job ? Remember I said "help funding"
  • wiplashwiplash Member Posts: 7,537
    edited November -1
    lt496 wrote:
    Lol and a healthy snort.... For posting my assessment of the NRA and subsequently answering a members question directly I am now a 'poser' and should just go 'rant' on twitter or faceborg, so sayeth a couple 'new american' gun rights supporters and freedom warriors.

    I wonder if either will address the substance or just continue a display of cognitive dissonance?

    cog?ni?tive dis?so?nance
    The state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
    There is no such thing as Liberal Men, only Liberal Women with Penises.'
  • AlpineAlpine Member Posts: 14,855 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I see Lt496 hasn't changed a bit.

    Now I am reminded as to why I haven't missed him a bit.

    One of the loopholes the new software has admitted.
    ?The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.?
    Margaret Thatcher

    "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
    Mark Twain
  • Missouri Mule K30Missouri Mule K30 Member Posts: 2,095 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    A lesson on how to interpret words. Another baiting thread over the NRA. As for belonging to any organization that lobbies for the protection of the Second Amendment, is to help with many that will do better than NOTHING to defend against communism.

    The NRA was an organization that promoted the marksmanship of many kinds of firearms. Mainly Military, to help with in times of armed conflict Men that had some familiarity with martial arms.

    Then the NRA had to try and protect the right of the public to procure out of date martial arms to continue with the marksmanship programs. There was never any intension to become a lobby organization.

    Today the socialists list the NRA as the no1 organization that blocks their way to getting what they want. I do not want to live in a NAZI type government that TAKES ALL of the firearms so that the government at will can then next come into your home and tell you how to live, who to alienate.

    Is the NRA the perfect shield? No, the mission statement was to provide a marksmanship program for the U.S.A.. Now NRA has morphed into a lobbyist organization that has a bloated payroll and a leaderless mission other than to fight of socialists with their frivolous lawsuits. It is an organization that does not have a billionaire benefactor to cause havoc with the legal system.

    The NRA should be what the original intention used to be. Marksmanship programs.
    And then an organization should be made to lobby the Federal Government, and State Legislatures to continue with protecting the Right of ownership of all firearms as intended by the Second Amendment. Until then I will continue with my communication to my Federal Senators, Congressmen. State Senators, State Representatives, and keep my NRA membership until a lobby becomes available that can fight the socialists, communists that want to destroy our Country.

    God Bless the U.S.A.!
  • chiefrchiefr Member Posts: 13,068 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    mnrivrat48 wrote:
    " a couple 'new american' gun rights supporters and freedom warriors."

    As far as being new it is more likely you were still a gleam in you pappy's eye when I first joined the NRA. Just out of curiosity what organization are you helping fund that you think is doing a much better job ? Remember I said "help funding"

    Judging by his post, it must be the DEMOCRAT party.
  • WranglerWrangler Member Posts: 5,788
    edited November -1
    wpageabc wrote:
    OK poser...
    So you are going to represent us to fight the power?


    https://youtu.be/8PaoLy7PHwk
  • SCOUT5SCOUT5 Member Posts: 16,195 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    You eat an elephant one bite at a time. The NRA sells bites of the 2nd and it gets many of you to help pay for them. The NRA'a assaults against the 2nd are well documented. If the NRA fixed their political wing to full unflinching support of the 2nd I would send them a check. If they dropped their political wing and just focused on shooting sports and education I would send them a check. As long as they keep selling off the 2nd piecemeal I am gone to call them what they are. If some of you choose to support the incremental destruction of the 2nd by supporting an organization that participates in the process, that is your right. It is my right to fight against it.
  • Smitty500magSmitty500mag Member Posts: 13,598 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Alpine wrote:

    Now I am reminded as to why I haven't missed him a bit.

    Are you sure it's a HE? Sounds more like a soccer mom talking to her liberal friends on facebook.
  • ProceramicProceramic Member Posts: 392 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    lt496 wrote:
    wpageabc wrote:
    Why would you say yay to that?

    Umm, because the vaunted NRA has been in support of govt infringements of firearms since at least the 1920s. They have, historically and contemporaneously, partnered with govt to slow sell a vast array of gun control/infringements to trusting (and largely brainless) Americans for longer than any of us has trod this earth.

    If they went away, then we could focus on actual liberty and the essential fundamental liberty to keep and bear arms, without them framing a quisling and false paradigm and back-door dealing, lying to everyone and actually drafting gun control.

    Is this somehow new information?

    I continue to be amazed at the willful ignorance and abject cognitive dissonance displayed by my fellow citizens.

    Refreshing to see true supporters of the 2a who see through the NRA BS! Great seeing you back in here Lt, been awhile.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,229 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    wpageabc wrote:
    OK poser...
    So you are going to represent us to fight the power?

    There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

    As with any group, the NRA/ILA does some positive things. On balance (as has been well documented for those who open their eyes) the group is more about the legislated accessibility firearms and accessories of which they approve than it is about the individual liberty represented by the 2nd Amendment.

    Were the NRA to fold tomorrow, those who actually believe in the power of the individual over the collective will find another organization to support. So far as national firearms related advocacy groups such as the GOA, SAF, JPFO, etc. it will be an incredible step forward for individual liberty.

    Those that believe in the historic stance of the NRA's approach to legislated access will gravitate towards groups such as Everytown for Gun Safety, Courage to Fight Gun Violence, The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence or some other group that also supports Federal involvement in the individual decision as to how one chooses to arm himself.

    Have never given a dime to he NRA and never will. I have, however, given thousands of dollars to groups that are attempting to unwind some of the garbage that has been legislated because of the historical damage the NRA has done to our individual 2nd Amendment Liberty.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • droptopdroptop Member Posts: 8,925
    edited November -1
    bullshot wrote:
    I also own a thesaurus.

    Same here: smiley_sun5xgbjpg.jpg

    cognitive_def.JPG
  • Cornflk1Cornflk1 Member Posts: 3,719 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Liberals death by " law-suit". a common ploy now. They think they can control by bankrupting an orginisation.
  • Marc1301Marc1301 Member Posts: 31,904 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    SCOUT5 wrote:
    You eat an elephant one bite at a time. The NRA sells bites of the 2nd and it gets many of you to help pay for them. The NRA'a assaults against the 2nd are well documented. If the NRA fixed their political wing to full unflinching support of the 2nd I would send them a check. If they dropped their political wing and just focused on shooting sports and education I would send them a check. As long as they keep selling off the 2nd piecemeal I am going to call them what they are. If some of you choose to support the incremental destruction of the 2nd by supporting an organization that participates in the process, that is your right. It is my right to fight against it.
    Well said, and I am in full agreement.
    "Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life down here." - William Shatner
  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,845 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    See what I mean?
  • guntech59guntech59 Member Posts: 23,193 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    For those doing the name calling.....how about some facts that disprove what LT said.

    It is well known that the NRA has colluded with the government in the name of gun control. 1934, 1968....the list includes every piece of major anti-gun legislation ever passed.
  • badchrisbadchris Member Posts: 1,657 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    fudd.png
    Enemies of armed self-defense focus on the gun. They ignore the person protected with that gun.
  • westernMDhunterwesternMDhunter Member Posts: 2,936 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    guntech59 wrote:
    For those doing the name calling.....how about some facts that disprove what LT said.

    It is well known that the NRA has colluded with the government in the name of gun control. 1934, 1968....the list includes every piece of major anti-gun legislation ever passed.

    None of them can disprove what he said. The man speaks the truth and tells it like it is, we need more people like him.
  • guntech59guntech59 Member Posts: 23,193 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    guntech59 wrote:
    For those doing the name calling.....how about some facts that disprove what LT said.

    It is well known that the NRA has colluded with the government in the name of gun control. 1934, 1968....the list includes every piece of major anti-gun legislation ever passed.

    None of them can disprove what he said. The man speaks the truth and tells it like it is, we need more people like him.

    Agreed!
  • jimdeerejimdeere Member, Moderator Posts: 24,227 ******
    edited November -1
    Love them, hate them, that?s your choice. This should never fell to the NATIONAL Rifle Association to address. Where were the state gun organizations during this? This is there fight. The Virginia Citizens Defense League has fought gun control issues in Richmond for years. www.vcdl.org
    I?m not sure if I would be pleased if a national organization I supported spent resources to defend a state?s citizens who were to sorry to stand up for themselves.
  • lt496lt496 Member Posts: 128
    edited March 2019
    This post was an interesting exercise and one resulting much as I expected.

    Glad to see a few honest men and critical thinkers are among the typical Fuddite NRA sycophants, who by the way, rarely address or even entertain that their strongly held beliefs in the Quisling NRA (the official govt approved gun privileges organization) are based on myth, propaganda, lies and deceit.

    I had always hoped that with the passing of years and with the ever increasing attacks on individual liberty, particularly in the area of firearms, that the open shenanigans and duplicity of the NRA would cause even the most willfully ignorant to see what has been going on.

    Sadly, nothing has improved and it has become obvious that whatever divide already exists between the outright domestic enemies and those who facilitate their evil -vs- those who support freedom, who grasp the big picture and who oppose this evil wherever and from whom ever it presents, is not going to dramatically change.

    As for me, I have and continue to attempt to prompt people to question the current paradigm and to, perhaps, question in the face of a plethora of evidence, the peddled narratives and see the falsity for what it is.

    Oh well.

    Generally one must simply settle for exposing the diseased and blind fervent-minions who are at the root of the success of oppressive govt and the other enemies of individual liberty, such as the NRA.
    "Freedom is not for the timid" III% BFYTW
  • lt496lt496 Member Posts: 128
    edited November -1
    For your reading pleasure and for perspective from a long-time NRA member most should have heard of.

    Nice to see a man who is capable of self-examination of his formerly committed belief in the NRA. Such intellectual honesty is near as rare as hen's teeth. It certainly is around this thread to be sure.

    This is a few years old, at least.

    " Am I the NRA?

    by L. Neil Smith

    This coming August I'll have been a Life member of the National Rifle Association 22 years. If you're not a member yourself, it may surprise you to learn that, by the standards of that organization, born just after the War between the States, this isn't particularly long. I know people who've been in the NRA twice as long as I have, and one or two who've been members three times that number of years.
    It is long enough, however, to make me wonder, as one does upon occasion in any long-term relationship, whether, knowing everything I know today, after 22 years, I'd do it again. Lately, the answer seems to be -- and I'm sure the NRA will be devastated to learn this -- that I'd have to think about it.

    Knowing everything I know today, I'd want assurances this time that the NRA is willing and able to perform the task that brought me to it. I'd been in Junior NRA as a Scout, but the course of my life had taken me away from shooting (it seems hard to believe now) until just before that surrealistic year of 1968 when, as a newly-fledged handgun owner (we'd had an incident in the neighborhood) I recall sitting in front of the TV watching the assassination of Bobby Kennedy, knowing the proclivity of liberals to blame everyone but the perpetrator, and thinking, "Boy, we're gonna get it now." And so we did.

    And so I joined the NRA, although it took me five more years to get the cash together for Life membership. Since then, we've lost one fight after another until today, the infringements we deal with -- on an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right that was supposed to be absolutely guaranteed -- are beyond anything most members of the NRA 22 years ago would have believed.
    I was one of a few who saw the ugly future ahead, even then. Four years after I became a Life member, I wrote my first science fiction novel, full of dire predictions. I also wrote letters, not just to politicians, but to editors of gun magazines, even to the NRA's top banana, the guy who looked so much like Nikita Khrushchev, urging them to stop fighting the Battle of the Second Amendment as a holding action, a tactic we have seen was bound for inevitable defeat, and adopt an offensive strategy.

    Those editors (with a remarkable exception whose good judgement I'll repay by NOT associating his name with mine) laughed me off as an alarmist. I never heard from the bald guy at the NRA. And why should I? Who was I? Just some nobody, worried over what was about to happen to his unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human rights. For that matter, who am I today? Just a 22-year Life member wondering whether he'd do it all over again, remember?

    As I say, I'd want assurances this time, sort of a prenuptial agreement, before I slipped the metaphorical ring on my trigger finger. My 22 years of experience have taught me a few things -- a dozen of them, roughly -- about defending the Second Amendment. For the life of me, I don't understand why they haven't taught the same things to the NRA.

    FIRST, I'd want the NRA not to write any more legislation. It's said the NRA leadership wrote the Gun Control Act of 1968 (before my time, if you'll recall). I know they wrote the Maryland Handgun Ban because they were afraid that something worse was in the works. Fear seems to be their principal motivation, not anger or determination. Invariably it steers them toward a submissive, repulsive "strategy" of doing the enemy's work before he can do it himself.

    SECOND, I'd want the NRA not to trade away any more rights it "thinks" are less important for those it "thinks" are more so. The leadership would find, if they ever asked, that their membership often disagrees with them. The "cop-killer" bullet fiasco comes to mind, where we got trivial reforms in a devil's bargain -- letting them make some bullets illegal -- that serves our enemies so well today that one particularly repellent and evil Senator has based the sunset of his career on it.

    THIRD, I'd want the NRA to stop supporting government activities irrelevant, even harmful, to the Second Amendment. Increasingly, gun owners see that the War on Drugs, to name an example, was meant from the outset as a calculated assault on the Bill of Rights, especially on the Second Amendment. It must end if there's to be anything left of the Constitution in the 21st century. That isn't the NRA's job, but it should butt out of the debate. Its "Operation Crimestrike", celebrating patently illegal incursions against individual rights is nothing more than a sustained, humiliating grovel -- like having to watch another kind of civil rights advocacy crawl up on the verandah and whine, "See Massah, what a good boy Ah is?"

    FOURTH, in the same context, I'd want the NRA to disconnect all future discussion of the Second Amendment from the totally unrelated topic of crime. My rights have nothing whatever to do with anything anybody else does, right or wrong. If the crime rate were only 1/10 that of today, my rights would be unaffected. Likewise, if the rate were TEN TIMES what it is, it would have nothing whatever to do with my individual right to own and carry weapons.

    FIFTH, I'd want the NRA to reject all future argument about the "sporting use" of weapons -- why look like an imbecile, pushing the AK-47 as a deer rifle, when it meets the Founding Fathers' ACTUAL criteria so elegantly? -- in favor of frank and frequent public reference to the original Constitutional purpose for an armed citizenry, which is to intimidate the government.

    SIXTH -- and this may be the most important point I'll make, so pay attention -- I'd want the NRA to adopt as its principal and publicly-acknowledged objective the repeal or nullification of every weapons law, at every level of government in America. The Second Amendment is explicit about this and requires no esoteric legal interpretation. Check the dictionary meaning of "enfringe" if you doubt my word.

    SEVENTH, in support of that objective, I'd want the NRA to print ads, half a page in every issue, in all its periodicals, reminding members of the duty and power of an American jury to nullify any law it believes unjust or unconstitutional. Alcohol prohibition died this way. Gun prohibition could, as well. All it takes is eight and a third percent of the population, one twelfth, to carry it off.

    EIGHTH, I'd want the NRA to establish programs to educate the police in their absolute obligation (given the Nuremburg trials after World War II) to enforce only those statutes -- and obey only those commands -- that are lawful, i.e., constitutional. For many decades, the NRA has spent a lot of resources in what can only be described as sucking up disgustingly to the military and the cops; it's past time we got something out of it. (I'm an ex-reservist, my brother's a deputy, and we both grew up in the Air Force, so don't give me a hard time -- this is the truth, and we all know it.)

    NINTH, I'd want the NRA to give up the self-defeating notion that you can keep guns OUT of the hands of the "wrong" folks, while simultaneously and miraculously keeping them IN the hands of the "right" folks. Each of us is somebody else's badguy. In the last century, laws were passed to keep guns from Italians and the Irish. Earlier this century it was blacks and now it's those who believe in the Bill of Rights. Get it straight: the latter could never have happened if the former hadn't been possible. No more background checks, NRA, no more prior restraint. History, ancient and recent, clearly shows that if the badguys have guns, the only way to handle it is to make sure as many goodguys have guns as possible.

    TENTH, while we're on the subject of prior restraint, I'd want the NRA to abandon its strategically idiotic enthusiasm for government-controlled concealed carry -- illegal under the Second Amendment -- in favor of uncontrolled and legal "Vermont Carry". If it won't, I guarantee that in years to come, someone will say: the NRA wants your name on this piece of paper BEFORE you'll be allowed to exercise your unalienable individual, Constitutional, civil, and human rights. The NRA wants your age, address, phone, sex, race, social security number, photograph, and fingerprints as a cost of doing what the Framers meant you to do without all that. In short, it wants to impose the very system of gun and owner registration we've been fighting more than 60 years!

    Huey Long, virtual dictator of Louisiana in the 1930s when Mussolini was making the trains run on time, was asked by the press, "Will we ever have fascism in America?" "Yes," Long replied with a grin, "but we'll call it Anti-fascism." I can guarantee that someone will say all of this, because if nobody else does, I will. And to the advocates of licensed carry, I say now: don't you realize how pathetic you look, lying there with your OWN foot on your neck?

    ELEVENTH, I'd want the NRA to make endorsements based on the candidate's respect for the Second Amendment, regardless of his affiliation or its estimate of his chances. It's suicidal -- if only because it denies us leverage we'd otherwise possess over the Republicans -- to say a third party candidate can't win, and on that self-fulfilling basis, withhold endorsement that could give him, and us, a victory. If "NRA" stands for "National Republican Association" let it be said plainly and stop what amounts to a consumer fraud. If not, then if a candidate's unwilling to be photographed for public consumption firing a machine gun, a semiautomatic rifle with a long, curved magazine, or a pistol with a fat, two-column grip, he can't be trusted whatever his affiliation, and shouldn't be endorsed.

    TWELFTH, I'd want the NRA to reduce its Board of Directors to no more than 20, so they can lead instead of turning things over to a tiny, often misguided elite. One director I know told me the NRA is in trouble precisely because its huge, unwieldy board flounders helplessly, leaving policy in the hands of a "troika" with its own agenda. It's time for that to end.

    In general, I'd give the NRA the same advice I give everybody else. Never let anybody keep you from enjoying your rights to the fullest, not for a day, not for a minute. Never let anybody stand in your way. Never accept even the most reasonable-sounding excuse for why you can't have everything you deserve. Never accept compromise.

    Worse than thieves, murderers, or cannibals, those who offer compromise slow you and sap your vitality while pretending to be your friends. They are not your friends. Compromisers are the enemies of all humanity, the enemies of life itself. Compromisers are the enemies of everything important, sacred, and true.

    So, would I join the NRA all over again, after 22 years, knowing everything I know today? I guess I'm still thinking about it.
    Give me a reason, NRA. "
    "Freedom is not for the timid" III% BFYTW
  • DirtyDawgDirtyDawg Member Posts: 1,076 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    NRA = Negotiated Rights Association
  • lt496lt496 Member Posts: 128
    edited November -1
    Oh no....bad-think and bad-speak.


    "The National Rifle Association has been in support of workable, enforceable gun control legislation since its very inception in 1871."

    ?NRA Executive Vice President Franklin L. Orth
    NRA's American Rifleman Magazine, March 1968, P. 22
    "
    "Freedom is not for the timid" III% BFYTW
  • lt496lt496 Member Posts: 128
    edited November -1
    Gasp!

    https://www.ammoland.com/2019/03/contact-nra-about-not-supporting-any-red-flag-laws/#axzz5jlcX6NAE

    "Virginia ? -(AmmoLand.com)- The NRA has taken a public position supporting Red Flag laws. This happened last year."
    "Freedom is not for the timid" III% BFYTW
  • pip5255pip5255 Member Posts: 1,614 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    In defense of the NRA they infact helped me to be able to obtain a concealed carry permit by getting the power back to the county sheriffs office instead of the local chief of police who would not approve anyone he did not personally know, his time in office also was short lived. Without the help of the NRA I was fighting a losing battle but they got it reversed.
    just because you could doesn't mean you should
  • lt496lt496 Member Posts: 128
    edited March 2019
    Say it isn't so....

    "Las Vegas shooting: NRA urges new rules for gun 'bump-stocks'
    5 October 2017

    The National Rifle Association has called for "additional regulations" on bump-stocks, a rapid fire device used by the Las Vegas massacre gunman.

    The group said: "Devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."

    Republicans have said they would consider banning the tool, despite years of resisting any gun control.

    Lawmakers plan to hold hearings and consider a bill to outlaw the device.

    The NRA called on Thursday for regulators to "immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law".

    President Donald Trump later told reporters his administration would be looking into whether to ban them "in the next short period of time"
    ."
    "Freedom is not for the timid" III% BFYTW
  • select-fireselect-fire Member Posts: 69,479 ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2019
    Leave me see.. the NRA was created and then became a business. There is a huge difference of an organization and a business. So now their britches are so large politicians listen to them. Money.. Money is a funny thing.. folks like to be on the side of money. Play some AC/DC.. Money does talk.
  • lt496lt496 Member Posts: 128
    edited November -1
    This cannot be true.


    Local gun groups flex muscle in state politics, sidestepping the NRA

    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/08/local-gun-groups-flex-muscle-in-state-politics-sidestepping-the-nra.html

    "....."It's always kind of interesting when you see a lot of people in the gun control community talk about how radical the NRA is," said Pruett, whose group organized an email and telephone campaign to pass a 2016 Idaho law allowing people to carry concealed handguns without a permit, also known as "constitutional carry."

    "There's an entire movement on the other side of the NRA ... We're done compromising," he said.

    Missouri Firearms Coalition political advisor Aaron Dorr says the NRA fought against constitutional carry for years, considering it too much of a longshot, and only came on board once passage was certain.....

    ....CJ Grisham, who founded Open Carry Texas in 2013, said organizations like his were established to fill a void left by the NRA. "I would not have formed Open Carry Texas if the NRA was doing its job," he said.

    The most uncompromising among them say the NRA has become too timid and too willing to back measures such as removing firearms from people deemed dangerous.

    "I call it pre-emptive concession," said Paul Valone, president of Grass Roots North Carolina, which has helped expand concealed carry rights and a "stand your ground" law.....
    "
    "Freedom is not for the timid" III% BFYTW
  • lt496lt496 Member Posts: 128
    edited November -1
    Hmmm.

    https://www.ammoland.com/2018/01/are-we-revising-nra-history/#axzz54sQLbOEv

    Are We Revising NRA History?
    Ammoland Inc. Posted on January 18, 2018 by Jeff Knox
    "Freedom is not for the timid" III% BFYTW
  • lt496lt496 Member Posts: 128
    edited November -1
    That will do as a primer, for now.
    "Freedom is not for the timid" III% BFYTW
Sign In or Register to comment.