.

Firearm Blog Says it Better than either anti or pro NRA

tr foxtr fox Member Posts: 13,856
IMHO, totally destroying the NRA and hoping to be able to reconstruct it, or hoping another world-wide lobbying organization will take it's place, is about as foolish as concealed carry of a model 1911 with an empty chamber. You will chamber a round when you think you might need it. You will depend on the NRA when you think you might need it. Truth is when out and about you might ALWAYS need that chambered round and as you enjoy your 2A rights you might ALWAYS NEED organizations like the NRA. It looks like NRA reform is in motion. Let's give it a chance to deliver an improved NRA while we pro-2A people continue to support the few other effective pro-2A lobbying groups in existence. Seriously, can we EVER have TOO MANY gun rights organizations in existence? If the answer is "yes" I would like to hear how that is possible.


https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2019/04/28/firearm-ownership/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=2019-04-30&utm_campaign=Weekly+Newsletter

Comments

  • mag00mag00 Member Posts: 4,668
    edited November -1
    Flawed logic, I've got a double action revolver.

    NRA is more like a Glock. :lol:
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 21,840 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The article makes sense, and accurately points out fundamental flaw in the NRA approach to the 2nd Amendment starting in 1934 and continuing to this day.

    Many of us here have pointed out that the 2nd Amendment is an Individual Liberty construct and not a firearms ownership/possession construct. These two constructs can live in harmony, but not when the major (self-proclaimed) 2nd Amendment Rights organization in the country sacrifices one in the hopes to save the other.

    There is legitimate concern that the NRA has done more harm than good regarding the Individual Liberty so as to either maintain a funding stream or to pacify those in the organization that do not fully understand or believe in the true nature of Individual Liberty.

    Until that changes, IMO, there is no reason to lose much sleep over the loss of the NRA.

    As I have stated before, if the organization embarks upon a thorough overhaul, complete with a clear mission statement regarding Individual Liberty not be sacrificed for short term gain, I will support it.

    Until then, its demise is no great loss. Perhaps no loss at all.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • Mr. PerfectMr. Perfect Member Posts: 59,459 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Depending on the NRA to defend 2A is like shooting yourself in the foot. THAT is the proper analogy applicable here. Not some haphazard strawman analogy that was so hastily assembled one dare not light a match any where near it.
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    And fiery auto crashes
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    While sifting through my ashes
    Some will fall in love with life
    And drink it from a fountain
    That is pouring like an avalanche
    Coming down the mountain
  • pickenuppickenup Member, Moderator Posts: 22,361 ******
    edited November -1
    Reading the comments on that post leads me to believe we are not alone in our assessment of the NRA.
    NOT a flattering thread for the NRA, because it is "mostly" truthful.
    They have a few positives for the NRA that I could prove otherwise, but they are close.
    Thanks for posting this trfox.
Sign In or Register to comment.