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.
quote:Originally posted by gunphreak
Why, Wounded Wolf??
Consider that championing a cause does not mean concessions.
A compromise on this subject is awful. Generally, when concessions are made, both sides agree to give something up. Where are the antigunners giving anything up? They are merely settling for a half-hearted law, which doesn't extend as far as they would like, but does take something from us. Meanwhile, nothing is being taken from them, and we buy ourselves a little time before the real battle occurs.
I've had enough of that!!! Civil disobedience, anyone???
Great point of view ! It seems that all us Americans ever do is give up things........I think its time to take back !!
I just logged back in after a while. It's great to see such a productive thread around here. I agree with pickenup's premise, and I believe that WoundedWolf has added much useful information.
Do you guys think it would be best to send this off as one big letter, or many small ones. I think it would be difficult to snail mail this along to member after member, for the sole purpose of each member signing it. There are too many ways the hard copy (along with all previous members' signatures) could get lost among the ranks. I think it would probably be best to come up with a final draft of the letter, and then ask each member of the forum to send it seperately.
As for gunphreak's civil disobedience idea: Sounds good, but keep in mind that anybody's noble aspirations won't help them when they get charged with an NFA violation. [V]
quote:Originally posted by dsmith
I think it would probably be best to come up with a final draft of the letter, and then ask each member of the forum to send it seperately.
dsmith,
We want to come up with the final copy, and have people sign it, either electronically, or separately and send their copy in to someone willing to collect them. Then send the whole package to the NRA at one time.
Like you said, it does has the possibility of getting lost, but I have done something similar before. The TIME it would take to send it around, especially if we get a good number of signors, would not work out well.
My opinion for what it is worth! I don't believe that mailing around a petition for actual signatures will work. It would become a nightmare to get the numbers we need that way,........I still think e-mail based is the best. We can get around to all kinds of different forums that way,........but like Wagon Wheel said, that is the last thing to do.
I am in favor of "anyone" here, that is a writer type,.......better than me, to just go ahead and form a document, that involves what we have talked about.
Pickenup, Wagon Wheel, lt496, and even Highball would be my choices for this. It appears that TRFox has no interest whatsoever in this,......and that is his choice.
Sorry for the "even" Highball statement,........I think he could do a good job also, as long as it didn't become too "threatening".
I agree with others,.......there needs to be a list of where they have gone wrong, a commitment to leave the organization, if they don't make changes,..........and a demand for an explanation of how they feel about our rights.
One of you "fellers", with the art for drafting a document, just need to start on it, and present it, when you are finished,.........then everyone can pitch in with comments pro, or con.
Heck, why don't several of you comprise one, and we will take the best parts out of each. I believe that is what needs to be done at this point, to get this ball rolling,..........or not?
"Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life down here." - William Shatner
As for gunphreak's civil disobedience idea: Sounds good, but keep in mind that anybody's noble aspirations won't help them when they get charged with an NFA violation. [V]
That's why if you do it, shut up about it. Don't even tell your wife...
Still, I cannot advocate it, as I am confident there will be no shortage of them once the hammer drops, and I firmly believe we outnumber them so badly, picking up a couple guns a piece won't be too much trouble....
As I recall, the original complaint was that very few folks that have attempted to contact the NRA ever receive a response. The purpose of this petition was to evoke a response from the NRA, good, bad, or indifferent.
I think a petition that says, "We want you to be like GOA, otherwise we will all cancel our memberships!" is probably guaranteed to evoke a negative response. I will not be signing that petition.
Instead I hope we can get back to the spirit of pickenup's opening post, specifically the part about "The petition has to be factual, and cordial. Do your homework. No attacks of any kind."
I could agree with WWolf about the original intent of this,.......but I feel there is little interest in it. Not giving up too soon,........but I am expressing what I feel at this point.
We are divided,........greatly, even here, on what we are willing to do. Some want a total collapse of the "system", and wait for that with baited breath,........others, wish to be collaboraters with the NRA, and I presume are afraid of raising their profile to the Gov, and the NRA also.
I will not be commenting on this further, unless something changes.
It was a worthwhile thought, I do believe.
"Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life down here." - William Shatner
Personally I feel this "petition" as some would have it, will accomplish absolutely nothing. Pickenup has a great idea. Now where I see problems:
No one is willing to address what must be done to INSTITUTE a change in the NRA. You want them to answer for theselves, yet are unwilling to bring down a corrupt business. You don't want to address what you expect to be done,nor address what YOU will do if THEY don't do as you want. We have the SAME problem with the current den of snakes in political positions. You don't like it , YET refuse to draw YOUR lines in the sand. Perhaps this is why the NRA is a crap organization. Perhaps this is why we have a crappy bunch of "empty suits". If your not gong to do this , FULL FACE NO COMPRIMISE, then why do it at all? You really think the NRA will take you few SERIOUSLY if you WON'T act? Lets get real for a minute, and review history. Newtons law says a object in motion (or movement of ideas) will stay IN MOTION until acted upon BY AN OPPOSITE FORCE (or MOVEMENT OF IDEAS). Unless you are willing to be SOME KIND OF FORCE their "movement" WILL continue.
FURTHERMORE, what good comes from answered questions, but reoccuring RESULTS? CLEARLY, you want change right? Then do something to MAKE that happen. If you won't state your intent clearly, what are you giving them to THINK about?
The BEST solution to this HUGE problem is for people to cancel ALL memberships and donations, be it lifetime OR yearly. Take AWAY their ability to destroy OUR RIGHTS. Otherwise you only ENABLE it.
Somebody like me would be necessary to draft the petition.
The problem, of course, being that only a bare handful would sign it, in todays kinder, gentler world....
AFter careful consideration...I want no part of it. Read again the post on the usurpations we are suffering tody...and ask yourself exactly what good it would do to gain back a few gun rights. We are a subjucated people ALREADY...and there are ENTIRELY too many infringes upon EVERY Right to possible attack the problems one at a time.
There can be but one solution...and the Founders showed us what it is.
We can but wait some more..for the insults to libety are increasing at a steady pace.
quote:Originally posted by Highball
Yeppers, Freemind;
Somebody like me would be necessary to draft the petition.
The problem, of course, being that only a bare handful would sign it, in todays kinder, gentler world....
AFter careful consideration...I want no part of it. Read again the post on the usurpations we are suffering tody...and ask yourself exactly what good it would do to gain back a few gun rights. We are a subjucated people ALREADY...and there are ENTIRELY too many infringes upon EVERY Right to possible attack the problems one at a time.
There can be but one solution...and the Founders showed us what it is.
We can but wait some more..for the insults to libety are increasing at a steady pace.
It just seems to me Highball, people KNOW what MUST be done, just far too few are willing. If we only ASK people to explain their actions, what comes of it. The deed is still done. If you don't like it, CHANGE it right? Destroy that which seeks to destroy you. Survival of the fitest. Only with total control comes total power. Far too many seem all too willing to give up. The desire to fight is all but gone from those whom WOULD matter it seems. Well, unless it is a war with words to a computer screen.[:)]
quote:Originally posted by freemind
quote:Originally posted by Highball
Yeppers, Freemind;
Somebody like me would be necessary to draft the petition.
The problem, of course, being that only a bare handful would sign it, in todays kinder, gentler world....
AFter careful consideration...I want no part of it. Read again the post on the usurpations we are suffering tody...and ask yourself exactly what good it would do to gain back a few gun rights. We are a subjucated people ALREADY...and there are ENTIRELY too many infringes upon EVERY Right to possible attack the problems one at a time.
There can be but one solution...and the Founders showed us what it is.
We can but wait some more..for the insults to libety are increasing at a steady pace.
It just seems to me Highball, people KNOW what MUST be done, just far too few are willing. If we only ASK people to explain their actions, what comes of it. The deed is still done. If you don't like it, CHANGE it right? Destroy that which seeks to destroy you. Survival of the fitest. Only with total control comes total power. Far too many seem all too willing to give up. The desire to fight is all but gone from those whom WOULD matter it seems. Well, unless it is a war with words to a computer screen.[:)]
To make such a petition as powerful as possible, it might be best to either have one talented person here compose the petition/letter and cleary state the various positions here. Along with the various objections, disagreements, questions, request for clarifications, etc. that are found among all the interested parties here. This petition/letter written by one person would of course be composed with input from the other interested members.
Then, once composed and agreed on by everyone (well, at least most everyone) it should probably be mailed one copy to each of the NRA Directors instead of just generally to the NRA, or worse to whomever usually receives such letters/petitions and is so desensitized to receiving that they would not give it the notice it would need.
However, since once received by each NRA director, the letter would have been written by only one person and that means it would not have the heavy impact of having come from all of you. That failing can be addressed by picking a mailing date, mail the letter/petition and at the same time each and very interested person (I'm in) also write and mail their own letter stating they fully agree with and support the letter/petition that was just received as written by the one writer I mentioned at the top of this post.
BTW Pickenup, you are correct in that when we tried to actually do something and maybe make at least a small change for the better regarding giving third party canidadates a chance, I only got about 3-4 responses in my postal mail box. This small response inspite of numerous stated interested GB.com members. Sad indeed. Much talk a little action.
I guess I am down on the petition idea at this point. It seems like many want to send a letter that chastizes the NRA for not carrying their water.
I suggest anyone who is a current member that is so disgusted with the NRA should send a letter cancelling their membership and telling them specifically why. Perhaps as TR Fox suggests, for maximum effect, coordinate a date when all of you can do it at the same time.
As for me, I don't have that high of expectations for the NRA at this point, so when they do something against my position then I am usually not that surprised or disappointed anymore. I am still a member, but I don't expect them to carry my water. I will carry my own.
It involves the NRA intimating that 'you gun rights will be gone if you don't send big bucks to us"...while working tirelessly to undermine the Second Amendment.
Sally Struthers uses the same tactic to get people to send her money to save starving kids in Africa. I don't send her a dime. There are a lot of organizations out there that use fear, intimidation, and misrepresentation as tactics to drum up funding and support.
It is up to each individual to choose whether to believe the hype or not. The most potent way for someone to protest the activities of the NRA (or any organization) is to not support them financially or otherwise. But don't resent the people that do. There are millions of people that send money to TBN and buy the National Enquirer each week, but that is their choice to waste their money.
This whole petition idea started as an attempt to send a respectful, but firm, message to the NRA from its members and ex-members saying that we are not satisfied with the way they have conducted themselves. Unfortunately it has devolved into just another NRA bashing thread.
The biggest complaint that I hear is that the NRA is compromising on this or that issue, or that they are not lobbying for enough pro-gun legislation, or that they aren't demanding the repeal of current gun laws. We all obviously have access to the internet here, so if the NRA doesn't represent the message that you want them to, then fire them and do it yourself! Save $35 a year and write your own e-mails to your representatives whenever an anti-gun bill comes up. Keep track of the legislation yourself. Or hire your own lawyers and lobbyists. If enough people follow suit then the NRA will be irrelevant. But instead I just keep reading from people who complain how the NRA isn't representing them. If you aren't a member of the NRA anymore, or have never been, then who cares if they represent you or not?
I think what really irks the anti-NRA crowd is that the NRA still gets all the media attention. So go get your celebrity friends to join GOA, then maybe your average Liberal on the street might know what the hell GOA is in 10 or 15 years.
I sent you the following e-mail, last week, which came back as undeliverable.
Wagon Wheel here. I've got a favor to ask of you. With the demise of the NRA letter/petition idea, I've been working on an "appeal for unity" among gun owners post. It is basically constructed from the NRA information you posted. I pulled a string on it here and there and have added my own comments to, I believe, make a sound argument for unity. I haven't finished it yet but would like to run it past you when I do. Then, my favor, I would hate to see it relegated into obscurity so, my request is for another "Sticky". One that is locked out to comments and one where YOU hold all editorial control to add or delete information. A read only thread. I would not expect any commitment from you until you have had time to review and, if you feel it necessary, edited the post. The purpose of this e-mail is just to get your opinion of the idea and make whatever preps you may need to do so that if you agree, when I finish it, we lose no time getting it posted. It may be to long to e-mail but I think you should review it.
It is longer now and I am calling it done, for now, and posting it behind this one. Links to it could make a letter/petition considerably shorter and much more manageable. Merely E-mailing the link to Gun Owners or Posting it on other forums could have a profound effect. Do with it whatever you deem best.
This is a plea for unity, plain and simple. If you own any type of firearm, from a BB gun to a .50 BMG, a howitzer, tank, Civil War Cannon. whatever, for whatever reason or purpose, I appeal to your intellect, curiosity and common sense, to read this. What do you have to lose???
It is becoming clear, finally, to a lot of American citizens that our Constitution and The Bill Of Rights are under attack. Modern Lawmakers are doing whatever possible to restrict our rights by passing legislation that does not reflect the will of the people. Examples: McCain-Feingold, (Became Public Law No: 107-155 on 3/27/2002), The "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE" (Another affront to our 1st Amendment Rights): http://www.aim.org/aim_report_cliffs_notes/5229_0_4_0/ . Our Esteemed Legislators no longer seem to serve "The People" and instead, seem to be promoting a much more sinister agenda of "Globalization" and A Total Scuttling of our National Sovereignty. (ie: Open Borders, The NAU, and This Immigration Reform Act.) The present Immigration Debate is 100% Political "Smoke and Mirrors" in support of a political agenda. BUT, that's another story.
Now you may ask, where am I going with this??
Although the first unconstitutional violation of The Constitution was exercised by President Lincoln, since then the assault has not ceased but rather become the norm. Law after law (even some that were not ratified) have been enacted into Law in direct opposition to the Constitution AND The Bill Of Rights. An easy target of these Unconstitutional Laws seems to be the 2nd Amendment. So far, there have been OVER 20,000 such Unconstitutional Gun Laws put on the books PAVING THE WAY for these other violations of the Constitution and Bill Of Rights. It is only getting worse as time passes and every success emboldens these LAW-makers to take these restrictions a step further. Incrementally, they are STEALING our Heritage and stripping us of our Rights!!!
The American People gave them an inch; they've taken a mile. And they, STILL, are not satisfied. What is even worse, in all this madness, they, these constant violators of our rights, seem to have a willing ally.
Now, this may be hard for some to digest and harder still for others to accept. It is, however, documented FACT. But first, let me remind you hunters and target shooters that your sporting activities ARE NOT offered up ANY kind of Guarantees in the founding documents. Some STATES have passed that legislation, but of what value is that if the FEDERAL Government bans ALL firearms and makes access to ammunition almost imposable? There is a move afoot to do just that as a means to get around the 2nd Amendment. If the 2nd Amendment Dies, so to goes your privileges to hunt when they take YOUR guns also!!! And if you still think your "Hunting" or "Target Shooting" firearms are safe, then you, plain and simply put, are NOT familiar with the current pending legislationS.
My intent here is not as an NRA basher. Only to expose some of the current MYTHS surrounding their activities on our behalf, as firearms owners. As a Token Example Of NRA support for Your 2nd Amendment Rights:
Let us first consider the "Uniform Machinegun Act" which provided for the registration of machine guns and was adopted in a few states Conn., Va., Md., Ark., and Montana and quite possibly others. This Legislation was developed with the support of the NRA, BEFORE the feds ultimately adopted the "National Firearms Act" in 1934. The reason this stands out, is that MANY people believe that the "National Firearms Act of 1934" was THE pivotal law, the first of the Unconstitutional Laws. Thereby clearing an ever-widening path, allowing for further infringements.
"The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate
and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol, revolver ammunition.
The NRA supported legislation to amend the "Federal Firearms Act" in regard to handguns when it was introduced in August, 1963.
In 1965, the NRA continued its support of an expansion of the above legislation to include rifles and shotguns, as well as handguns.
Where was the NRA when the most sweeping gun control bill in history, The 1968 Gun Control Act, was passed? Granted, with that success, the brazen assaults have been stepped up and become ever more inclusive, incrementally!!! When a Ruger 1022 makes the list of firearms they want banned, it SHOULD TELL YOU SOMETHING!!! Now we face H.R. 1022, H.R. 297 and if your not up to speed S. 1237 among others!! You need to view these bills!!! (There is NO NRA OPPOSITION.)
Additionally the NRA supported the regulations concerning the movement of handguns in interstate and foreign commerce by:
1. Requiring a sworn statement, containing certain information, from the purchaser to the seller for the receipt of a handgun in interstate commerce;
2. Providing for notification of local police of prospective sales;
3. Requiring an additional 7-day waiting period by the seller after receipt of acknowledgement of notification to local police;
4. Prescribing a minimum age of 21 for obtaining a license to sell firearms and increasing the license fees;
5. Providing for written notification by manufacturer or dealer to carrier that a firearm is being shipped in interstate commerce, and;
6. Increasing penalties for violation.
NRA HELPED WRITE the 1986 federal law prohibiting the manufacture and importation of "armor piercing ammunition" adopted standards.
The NRA has been hard at work, over the last few years, turning a RIGHT (guaranteed by our constitution) into a revocable PRIVILEGE. Many pro-gun people commend them for this. Others see it for what it really is. INFRINGMENT!!
"Project EXILE" IS the NRA's very own pet project.
NRA'S project (EXILE) supports ALL Unconstitutional gun laws. Handgun Control Inc. supports it TOO. NRA-ILA Executive Director James Jay Baker commented, "I'm glad that the president has finally agreed with the NRA that enforcing federal firearms laws makes sense. We've been pushing for more enforcement of existing laws. Their version of enforcement equals expanding the current infringement and creating additional new ones.
How many of these QUOTES support the 2nd Amendment OR Your Understanding of said Amendment????
1). It was NRA PRESIDENT Dr. C.R. (Pink) Gutermuth, who saw "no problem with gun registration," and was head of the Wildlife Management Institute, who became NRA President in 1973.
Part of the problem began during the unlamented regime of former Executive Vice President Warren Cassidy. NRA lobbyists under Cassidy stopped opposing gun control bills and started offering NRA-approved versions of the same legislation. They started WRITING ANTI-GUN LEGISLATION.
Politicians were lobbying their colleagues for the so-called "instant check?" These pro-gunners were pushing a gun control bill that the NRA was strongly supporting.
2). Jim Baker of the NRA was quoted by USA Today on October 26, 1993 as saying: "We already support 65% of the Brady bill, because it moves to an instant check, which is WHAT WE WANT."
3). NRA spokesman Bill McIntrye said that the instant background check also in the bill "will be a victory for gun owners".
4). From NRA Board member Tanya Metaksa: I think this agreement was a victory for those who see flaws in the current bill. This is a much different Brady bill. This bill sunsets into what we've been supporting for several years [the instant check]. If you look at it in the long range, IT`S OUR BILL in five years.
5). Denver NRA Members Meeting May 1, 1999. Then NRA Executive Vice President Wayne R. LaPierre, Jr., said: "First, we believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America's schools, period ... with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel." All across the country, school boards and state legislators started doing precisely what LaPierre suggested: shutting down school riflery programs, prohibiting historical firearms displays, forbidding hunter safety training with unloaded guns, and banning gun possession by teachers and other adults with carry licenses. A good example of the long range implications of what LaPierre endorsed back then, is the recent tragedy at Virginia Tech. Making schools a "gun free zone" where lunatics can murder with impunity, was his response to the Columbine shootings!! What happened to advocating responsible carry, by responsible citizens???
6). LaPierre also blessed gun show background checks by saying: "We will consider instant checks at gun shows when, and only when, this Administration stops (charging for NICS checks) and stops illegally compiling the records of millions of lawful gun buyers." In other words it IS OK as long as we don't have to pay you to violate our Rights!!!!
7). The next day President Charlton Heston flatly said on ABC "This Week" that he was "in favor of" gun show background checks. Within weeks, bills for gun show background checks - and "youth gun access" bans - had been submitted in both houses of Congress!
8). NRA Board of Directors member Larry Craig, was one of the co-sponsors of this bill, "Our Lady of Peace Act" ( http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h107-4757 ), which was introduced by Caroline McCarthy, and supported by Chuck Schumer along with the usual band of anti Second Amendment slime like, Ted Kennedy, Blanche Lincoln and Richard Durbin.
9). Most recently the NRA tried to derail a case in Washington DC. A case that ultimately overturned a gun ban. Why? Because they said it was "too good" and might actually make it before the supreme court. A supreme court (considering the make up of it now) where we have the best chance of them handing down a favorable ruling, than we have had in decades. With the very real potential, of the democrats gaining control in the next election (thereby giving them the opportunity to choose the next judges) if not now, WHEN? The decision has been appealed!!!
10). We can't forget the "help" we got from the NRA. In the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act." Not debating, if setting this kind of precedent with legislation, protecting industries, is right. Not debating whether the industry needed this protection. The point here is, that there was a CLEAN bill (800) on the floor, AT THE SAME TIME. Everyone agrees that either bill (397 or 800) would pass through the senate, with no problem. So it depended on the house. There are always more votes than there are co-sponsors of a bill. S. Bill 800 had over 250 signed on as co-sponsors. MORE than enough to pass it, CLEAN. Why did the NRA CHOOSE to back the anti-gun laden bill, when there was a CLEAN alternative? For a true PRO-gun advocate, this was a no brainer. We are still waiting to see, if the anti-gun attachments that were on the one that was passed, is going to come back and bite us in the backside.
11). What, in the NRA's Mindless agenda, constitutes Pro-Gun Legislation????
From their own newsletter:
MAKE YOURSELF HEARD AT TOWN HALL MEETINGS! Congress will be on its Memorial Day District Work Period next week. During this time, your Senators and Representative will be back home in their states and districts.
Many lawmakers use this time to hold town hall meetings, and take questions from their constituents. These meetings offer a tremendous opportunity for you to personally voice your strong support for a number of pro-gun bills pending in Congress.
Is this the "Representation" YOU want/expect in support of YOUR RIGHTS??? If so, that is sad, but it's one that I'm not happy with at all.
First Amendment Rights?
Was it the National Rifle Association that had ONE OF IT'S OWN MEMBERS, a pro-gun activist, ARRESTED at its national convention on, April 27, 2003 in Orlando, Florida for handing out pro-gun freedom literature from an organization known as the Free State Project, Inc. The unlucky NRA member was Timothy Condon, a Marine Corps Vietnam COMBAT Veteran and Director of Member Services for the rapidly growing Free State Project.
Recently the NRA tried to derail a case in Washington DC. The case that ultimately overturned a gun ban. Why? Because they said it was "too good" and might actually make it before the supreme court. A supreme court (considering the make up of it now) where we have the best chance of them handing down a favorable ruling, than we have had in decades. With the very real potential, of the democrats gaining control in the next election (thereby giving them the opportunity to choose the next judges) if not now, WHEN?
UPDATE: On Tuesday, 8 May, 2007, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. circuit, declined to review the decision in Parker v. District of Columbia--the case in March that upheld the Second Amendment as an individual right and struck down Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban. The decision not to review the case means that an earlier ruling by the three-judge panel will stand. SO, THE NRA WAS SUCCESSFUL in their derailment process and it will never be heard by the Supreme Court!!!!!
Admittedly, some of the following information is "historical" in nature. The present administration had nothing to do with it. On the same note, some of this information is CURRENT. It shows a distinct pattern. An agenda? There are more bills that the NRA HELPED WRITE, or WROTE themselves. Other, ANTI-GUN candidates, that they endorsed. But, if this doesn't open your eyes, nothing will.
While reading the following, keep in mind that former NRA board member Russ Howard, RESIGNED from the board. His words; "In the past 5 years I've become increasingly concerned over NRA's penchant for giving UNDESERVED grades to politicians who TRAMPLE on the 2nd Amendment."
In California JOAN MILKE FLORES vs. JANE HARMAN. 36TH CONGRESSIONAL
Flores is an anti-gun Republican who voted FOR the Los Angeles Assault Rifle Ban. Harman is an anti- gun Democrat who got an "A" rating from the NRA. Why an "A" rating? She was ANTI-GUN!!! Who later said that she supports the assault weapon ban.
CHRISTINE REED vs. TERRY FREIDMAN (State Assembly)
Reed was an anti-gun C-rated Republican Handgun Control Inc. member who had been mayor of Santa Monica. Reed who should have been an "F". Freidman was an F-rated incumbent Democrat who authored many anti-gun bills
TRICIA HUNTER: Hunter was state senator whose bid to retain office was based on high-profile attacks on "killer assault rifles". She was rated "A-" by the NRA.
Howard Dean got an A+ from the NRA while governor, he supported the assault weapons ban and Brady bill.
Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA). Did not vote when needed, but was helped by the NRA come re-election.
Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA) voted FOR the Brady Bill (3 times) then was helped by the NRA come re-election.
Congressman Elton Gallegly -- voted FOR the Brady bill and the assault weapon ban and got an A-, and an endorsement. NRA's Terry O'Grady said, 'Gallegly voted against us on Brady and the Crime Bill, but he's always been with us before. We've decided to forgive him, give him an A- and endorse him. SAY WHAT?
In Virginia, 15 legislators were given A ratings after they voted FOR both the one-gun-a-month ban AND the shotgun ban. 41 legislators who voted for either or both bans got A ratings. 7 got exceptional, "above the call of duty" ratings.
In North Carolina, some districts have two senators. In the '94 elections, District 20 was represented by Ted Kaplan and Marvin Ward. Both favored assault weapon bans, handgun registration, and a one-gun-a-month ban. Their challengers were solid pro-gunners Ham Horton and Mark McDaniels (who fought tooth and nail for CCW). Nevertheless, ILA upgraded both anti-gun incumbents to "A" (one was initially a C), endorsed them, and supported them by mailing orange alert cards to NRA members in their district. Kaplan and Ward lost anyway, as incensed local groups like Grass Roots NC broke ranks with ILA and helped elect the pro-gun challengers.
In NC in 1995, Senator Fountain Odom betrayed the 2nd Amendment by gutting the CCW bill in his subcommittee. The bill had come over in more or less tolerable format from the house. Odom fixed it so that only a few police instructors could give the mandatory training. NRA instructors were prohibited. He also worked to move un-permitted CCW from a misdemeanor to a felony, prohibit CCW with any alcohol "remaining" in the body, prohibit CCW in financial institutions, mandate that all training be fully repeated for each renewal, and gut statewide preemption. Limited preemption was restored in the full judiciary committee, but Odom betrayed us again, fixing it so CCW could be prohibited in any "park". Later on the floor, to give ILA cover, Odom amended the training section to allow NRA instructors to do the training. In 1996, Tanya Metaksa gave Odom an A, an endorsement, and an orange ALERT postcard mailing telling NRA members, "Senator Odom has demonstrated his commitment to our right to self-defense...Here's how you can help re-elect Fountain Odom -- a dedicated supporter of your Second Amendment rights. Help the campaign...make a contribution...spread the word to family, friends, and fellow gun owners... Sincerely, Tanya K. Metaksa." Odom's still trampling on our rights. Now he's pushing for a CCW liability law.
In Virginia in 1996, extreme "F" rated gun grabber Congressman Jim Moran faced "A" rated, NRA life member John Otey. The American Rifleman carried the following message: "THIS IS YOUR OFFICIAL PRO-GUN BALLOT FOR THE FOLLOWING DISTRICT: VIRGINIA 8, US CONGRESS.. .NO ENDORSEMENT"
NO endorsement for an A rated NRA life member challenging an F- rated gun grabber???
In Virginia, 3 congressmen who voted many times against gun rights and supported the Lautenberg ban, kept their A+ ratings (part of a large club of turncoat A and A+ politicians). Tom Davis got an A after voicing support for Brady and the assault weapon ban and orchestrating a unanimous vote of support for the one-gun-a-month ban as a Fairfax County Supervisor.
In Pennsylvania (1993), then Republican Minority Whip Matt Ryan INTRODUCED an assault rifle ban. In 1994, he kept his A+ rating.
Deborah Danuski, a Democrat from Lisbon, was endorsed by the anti-handgun group, while also receiving an "A-" from the NRA on its report card of candidates. As a matter of fact, in Maine, both the NRA and Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence supported 18 of the same candidates!
In Colorado, where the NRA supported Senator Wayne Allard for office, and even boosted his pro-gun lobby contributions to $37,000 since 1990, Allard stated flatly that he would support federal legislation requiring gun registration for private gun sales at gun shows. Is a legislator who wants to expand gun registration someone who stands up for the rights of gun owners?
From Virginia, where the NRA Political Victory Fund touted the pro-gun "accomplishments" of Delegate Jack Rollison. This is the same Rollison who in a press release had the unmitigated gall to paint Gun Owners of America and the Virginia Citizens Defense League, who have endorsed his opponent Jeff Frederick, as extremists and "milita-esque" organizations. This is the same Jack Rollison who wants to ban your right to self-defense in any restaurant that happens to sell liquor. And this is the same Jack Rollison who voted correctly on only two out of eight issues important to Virginia gun owners.
In 2006, the NRA rated Ron Paul (without argument, the MOST constitutional representative we have in office) with a "B" because he did not follow along in lock step, when the NRA endorsed (what Ron Paul saw) as an UNconstitutional bill. One that the NRA supported. Instead, they endorsed his UNproved, UNtested, DEMOCRATIC opponent.
Defenders Of Freedom???
John Dingell? The NRA's Golden Boy? The former NRA Director? The same guy who voted in favor of the 1994 "Assault" weapons ban and then resigned from the Board of Directors the day after the vote? The same Dingell who received the NRA's Harlon B. Carter Award, despite voting FOR an outright gun BAN? The same Dingell that coined the term"jack-booted thugs" when referring to the BATF? THAT Dingell?
The NRA awarded Assemblyman Rod Wright its "Defender of Freedom Award". This is the same Rod Wright who supported UNconstitutional limits on firearms purchases and background checks. This is the same Rod Wright who authored a bill to increase licensing fees from $3 to up to $100. Never mind the absurdity of bilking peaceable citizens of hundreds of dollars for making a constitutionally protected purchase. This champion of "freedom" apparently thinks it's perfectly acceptable to license and charge Americans for exercising their rights. The NRA's "Defender of Freedom" in 2001 voted against gun owners 62 percent of the time
The NRA also gave their "Defender of Freedom Award" to one Kevin Mannix, who ran for governor here in 2002. In 1999 Mannix was the architect of the worst piece of gun control legislation in 10 years, in the Oregon House.
If an organization claims to SPEAK FOR ME, then I WANT TO KNOW what they are doing/saying. If they make the claim that they champion MY RIGHTS, then I want them to DO IT, NOT compromise MY RIGHTS away.
Is the NRA supposed to be placed on a pedestal? Given FREE REIGN, where NO ONE is supposed to question their actions? Are they NOT to be held accountable for their actions? This organization, historically, advocates gun control laws that are Unconstitutional. Simply take a look at past and current gun laws. The NRA has played a large part in getting "MANY" of them passed. What part of, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED or "The Right To Keep And BEAR Arms", is hard to understand??? I am NOT saying that the NRA is TOTALLY ineffectual, only that they are apparently on the "Wrong side of the fence" where the 2nd Amendment is concerned. If you would like to investigate the NRA they are good at blowing their own horn. But, It does takes reading between the lines and further information sometimes to see the REAL agenda. Sometimes as noted above it doesn't!! Since when does it take a brain surgeon to know the only PRO-2nd Amendment legislation, H.R. 1092, Introduced (By Rep. Ronald Paul [R-TX]), is lying in committee, awaiting the same demise as it's predecessor, H. R. 1703, No sponsors, never brought up for debate, just left to die in committee. NO SUPPORT, or even a mention of its existence, FROM THE NRA!!!! How many gun laws has the NRA ever tried to have repealed? In how many states have they fought for a "Vermont Style" CCW law, rather than a compromise infringement of the 2nd Amendment?
Victory???
Yes. Occasionally. Some point to "Katrina", the most recent. However, I don't see the Katrina "Victory" doing Illinois gun owners any good. Do You?? A hollow victory at best, most will never see their firearms (or compensation) again!!! It was more of a PR victory for the NRA than anything else!!!
New, ever expanding, wider sweeping, "Laws" have precedence over that short-lived victory. Again, passed with NRA support!! (Directly or indirectly.) Condoning an action, by inaction, is the same as supporting that action!!! Unfortunately the NRA doesn't understand that either.
Did the NRA oppose SB16, the Daley "Assault Weapons" ban. A Carbon copy of H.R.1022??? What will it take to get the NRA to oppose H.R.1022 (or 297 for that fact) or will this sweeping "Assault Weapons Ban" fly under the radar as well.. And then the Gestapo comes knocking NATION-WIDE????
I am sure there are many that consider this an innocent bill, because it's only target is assault weapons and high cap. mags.!!! Ignorance or indifference (doesn't affect me) of the content will come as a surprise to those choosing to remain that way. (As it has in Illinois.) Then one day, in the very near future, they will be confused when the authorities show up to take their hunting rifles, handguns, everything!!!!
BOTTOM LINE????
It is time to set aside the divisive wedges driven between the different factions of gun owners. The gun grabbers in congress, with the obvious assistance of the NRA, have successfully divided us into our own "Special Interest Groups" and incrementally passed legislation that some accept and support because "It doesn't Affect me". For that very reason, deceptive labeling successfully deflects a lot of objections. Throw "Assault Weapons" and or "Large Capacity Magazines" into the title line and you've deflected 50% of the POSSIBLE opposers/objectioners from even looking at the content!!! The even greater danger is that it all goes unchallenged and, written into these unconstitutional laws, are infringements on other Amendments. Upon other Rights, guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Amendments that, otherwise, would be off limits and if attacked directly would create a public outcry.
Ignorance, indifference, self-gratification and the ME first mentality WILL be the Demise of Gun Ownership AND Freedom in this once great and proud nation!!
Other advocates of the 2nd Amendment, though they lack the membership numbers and clout of the NRA, have a better track record. Some have even been Labeled "RADICAL" by the MSM simply because they DO SUPPORT AND DEFEND the 2nd Amendment!!! I don't feel it necessary to tell you to whom I refer. The real intent is to unify ALL Gun Owners under one flag and believe it or not, the decision you make will effect the ultimate survival or demise of a once free nation.
ONLY when there is a massive out-cry of "FOUL", by the membership, will you see a change in NRA policy. If not NOW, When??? It's already almost to late!!!
Surely there are people following the news and receiving alerts from their organization of choice. With the NRA`s current stance and GOA fighting them on it, I just thought this thread needed a re-read. I am aware there have been others since; but this one, in my mind, provided the best information as well as solutions/a plan of attack. Although this thread died, neither the sentiment nor the debate has, and I also believe that of all the discussion on this subject, this one thread has been the most effective and should not die in cyberspace. Agree or disagree but it may be helpful to new members thinking about supporting a Second Amendment Advocate Organization. I will once again state, I am not Anti-NRA, I am just convinced that others do the job better and the NRA needs to be informed of the displeasure/held accountable for the wayward path they have chosen!!! These actions have long term negative consequences for us all and I for one have no desire to support the erosion of my rights just to escalate their status/clout with deaf, dumb or blind.
Comments
Why, Wounded Wolf??
Consider that championing a cause does not mean concessions.
A compromise on this subject is awful. Generally, when concessions are made, both sides agree to give something up. Where are the antigunners giving anything up? They are merely settling for a half-hearted law, which doesn't extend as far as they would like, but does take something from us. Meanwhile, nothing is being taken from them, and we buy ourselves a little time before the real battle occurs.
I've had enough of that!!! Civil disobedience, anyone???
Great point of view ! It seems that all us Americans ever do is give up things........I think its time to take back !!
Do you guys think it would be best to send this off as one big letter, or many small ones. I think it would be difficult to snail mail this along to member after member, for the sole purpose of each member signing it. There are too many ways the hard copy (along with all previous members' signatures) could get lost among the ranks. I think it would probably be best to come up with a final draft of the letter, and then ask each member of the forum to send it seperately.
As for gunphreak's civil disobedience idea: Sounds good, but keep in mind that anybody's noble aspirations won't help them when they get charged with an NFA violation. [V]
I think it would probably be best to come up with a final draft of the letter, and then ask each member of the forum to send it seperately.
dsmith,
We want to come up with the final copy, and have people sign it, either electronically, or separately and send their copy in to someone willing to collect them. Then send the whole package to the NRA at one time.
Like you said, it does has the possibility of getting lost, but I have done something similar before. The TIME it would take to send it around, especially if we get a good number of signors, would not work out well.
Good to see you back.
I am in favor of "anyone" here, that is a writer type,.......better than me, to just go ahead and form a document, that involves what we have talked about.
Pickenup, Wagon Wheel, lt496, and even Highball would be my choices for this. It appears that TRFox has no interest whatsoever in this,......and that is his choice.
Sorry for the "even" Highball statement,........I think he could do a good job also, as long as it didn't become too "threatening".
I agree with others,.......there needs to be a list of where they have gone wrong, a commitment to leave the organization, if they don't make changes,..........and a demand for an explanation of how they feel about our rights.
One of you "fellers", with the art for drafting a document, just need to start on it, and present it, when you are finished,.........then everyone can pitch in with comments pro, or con.
Heck, why don't several of you comprise one, and we will take the best parts out of each. I believe that is what needs to be done at this point, to get this ball rolling,..........or not?
As for gunphreak's civil disobedience idea: Sounds good, but keep in mind that anybody's noble aspirations won't help them when they get charged with an NFA violation. [V]
That's why if you do it, shut up about it. Don't even tell your wife...
Still, I cannot advocate it, as I am confident there will be no shortage of them once the hammer drops, and I firmly believe we outnumber them so badly, picking up a couple guns a piece won't be too much trouble....
I think a petition that says, "We want you to be like GOA, otherwise we will all cancel our memberships!" is probably guaranteed to evoke a negative response. I will not be signing that petition.
Instead I hope we can get back to the spirit of pickenup's opening post, specifically the part about "The petition has to be factual, and cordial. Do your homework. No attacks of any kind."
We are divided,........greatly, even here, on what we are willing to do. Some want a total collapse of the "system", and wait for that with baited breath,........others, wish to be collaboraters with the NRA, and I presume are afraid of raising their profile to the Gov, and the NRA also.
I will not be commenting on this further, unless something changes.
It was a worthwhile thought, I do believe.
No one is willing to address what must be done to INSTITUTE a change in the NRA. You want them to answer for theselves, yet are unwilling to bring down a corrupt business. You don't want to address what you expect to be done,nor address what YOU will do if THEY don't do as you want. We have the SAME problem with the current den of snakes in political positions. You don't like it , YET refuse to draw YOUR lines in the sand. Perhaps this is why the NRA is a crap organization. Perhaps this is why we have a crappy bunch of "empty suits". If your not gong to do this , FULL FACE NO COMPRIMISE, then why do it at all? You really think the NRA will take you few SERIOUSLY if you WON'T act? Lets get real for a minute, and review history. Newtons law says a object in motion (or movement of ideas) will stay IN MOTION until acted upon BY AN OPPOSITE FORCE (or MOVEMENT OF IDEAS). Unless you are willing to be SOME KIND OF FORCE their "movement" WILL continue.
FURTHERMORE, what good comes from answered questions, but reoccuring RESULTS? CLEARLY, you want change right? Then do something to MAKE that happen. If you won't state your intent clearly, what are you giving them to THINK about?
The BEST solution to this HUGE problem is for people to cancel ALL memberships and donations, be it lifetime OR yearly. Take AWAY their ability to destroy OUR RIGHTS. Otherwise you only ENABLE it.
Somebody like me would be necessary to draft the petition.
The problem, of course, being that only a bare handful would sign it, in todays kinder, gentler world....
AFter careful consideration...I want no part of it. Read again the post on the usurpations we are suffering tody...and ask yourself exactly what good it would do to gain back a few gun rights. We are a subjucated people ALREADY...and there are ENTIRELY too many infringes upon EVERY Right to possible attack the problems one at a time.
There can be but one solution...and the Founders showed us what it is.
We can but wait some more..for the insults to libety are increasing at a steady pace.
Yeppers, Freemind;
Somebody like me would be necessary to draft the petition.
The problem, of course, being that only a bare handful would sign it, in todays kinder, gentler world....
AFter careful consideration...I want no part of it. Read again the post on the usurpations we are suffering tody...and ask yourself exactly what good it would do to gain back a few gun rights. We are a subjucated people ALREADY...and there are ENTIRELY too many infringes upon EVERY Right to possible attack the problems one at a time.
There can be but one solution...and the Founders showed us what it is.
We can but wait some more..for the insults to libety are increasing at a steady pace.
It just seems to me Highball, people KNOW what MUST be done, just far too few are willing. If we only ASK people to explain their actions, what comes of it. The deed is still done. If you don't like it, CHANGE it right? Destroy that which seeks to destroy you. Survival of the fitest. Only with total control comes total power. Far too many seem all too willing to give up. The desire to fight is all but gone from those whom WOULD matter it seems. Well, unless it is a war with words to a computer screen.[:)]
quote:Originally posted by Highball
Yeppers, Freemind;
Somebody like me would be necessary to draft the petition.
The problem, of course, being that only a bare handful would sign it, in todays kinder, gentler world....
AFter careful consideration...I want no part of it. Read again the post on the usurpations we are suffering tody...and ask yourself exactly what good it would do to gain back a few gun rights. We are a subjucated people ALREADY...and there are ENTIRELY too many infringes upon EVERY Right to possible attack the problems one at a time.
There can be but one solution...and the Founders showed us what it is.
We can but wait some more..for the insults to libety are increasing at a steady pace.
It just seems to me Highball, people KNOW what MUST be done, just far too few are willing. If we only ASK people to explain their actions, what comes of it. The deed is still done. If you don't like it, CHANGE it right? Destroy that which seeks to destroy you. Survival of the fitest. Only with total control comes total power. Far too many seem all too willing to give up. The desire to fight is all but gone from those whom WOULD matter it seems. Well, unless it is a war with words to a computer screen.[:)]
Nice freemind! You are right.
Then, once composed and agreed on by everyone (well, at least most everyone) it should probably be mailed one copy to each of the NRA Directors instead of just generally to the NRA, or worse to whomever usually receives such letters/petitions and is so desensitized to receiving that they would not give it the notice it would need.
However, since once received by each NRA director, the letter would have been written by only one person and that means it would not have the heavy impact of having come from all of you. That failing can be addressed by picking a mailing date, mail the letter/petition and at the same time each and very interested person (I'm in) also write and mail their own letter stating they fully agree with and support the letter/petition that was just received as written by the one writer I mentioned at the top of this post.
BTW Pickenup, you are correct in that when we tried to actually do something and maybe make at least a small change for the better regarding giving third party canidadates a chance, I only got about 3-4 responses in my postal mail box. This small response inspite of numerous stated interested GB.com members. Sad indeed. Much talk a little action.
I suggest anyone who is a current member that is so disgusted with the NRA should send a letter cancelling their membership and telling them specifically why. Perhaps as TR Fox suggests, for maximum effect, coordinate a date when all of you can do it at the same time.
As for me, I don't have that high of expectations for the NRA at this point, so when they do something against my position then I am usually not that surprised or disappointed anymore. I am still a member, but I don't expect them to carry my water. I will carry my own.
It involves the NRA intimating that 'you gun rights will be gone if you don't send big bucks to us"...while working tirelessly to undermine the Second Amendment.
It is up to each individual to choose whether to believe the hype or not. The most potent way for someone to protest the activities of the NRA (or any organization) is to not support them financially or otherwise. But don't resent the people that do. There are millions of people that send money to TBN and buy the National Enquirer each week, but that is their choice to waste their money.
This whole petition idea started as an attempt to send a respectful, but firm, message to the NRA from its members and ex-members saying that we are not satisfied with the way they have conducted themselves. Unfortunately it has devolved into just another NRA bashing thread.
The biggest complaint that I hear is that the NRA is compromising on this or that issue, or that they are not lobbying for enough pro-gun legislation, or that they aren't demanding the repeal of current gun laws. We all obviously have access to the internet here, so if the NRA doesn't represent the message that you want them to, then fire them and do it yourself! Save $35 a year and write your own e-mails to your representatives whenever an anti-gun bill comes up. Keep track of the legislation yourself. Or hire your own lawyers and lobbyists. If enough people follow suit then the NRA will be irrelevant. But instead I just keep reading from people who complain how the NRA isn't representing them. If you aren't a member of the NRA anymore, or have never been, then who cares if they represent you or not?
I think what really irks the anti-NRA crowd is that the NRA still gets all the media attention. So go get your celebrity friends to join GOA, then maybe your average Liberal on the street might know what the hell GOA is in 10 or 15 years.
I sent you the following e-mail, last week, which came back as undeliverable.
Wagon Wheel here. I've got a favor to ask of you. With the demise of the NRA letter/petition idea, I've been working on an "appeal for unity" among gun owners post. It is basically constructed from the NRA information you posted. I pulled a string on it here and there and have added my own comments to, I believe, make a sound argument for unity. I haven't finished it yet but would like to run it past you when I do. Then, my favor, I would hate to see it relegated into obscurity so, my request is for another "Sticky". One that is locked out to comments and one where YOU hold all editorial control to add or delete information. A read only thread. I would not expect any commitment from you until you have had time to review and, if you feel it necessary, edited the post. The purpose of this e-mail is just to get your opinion of the idea and make whatever preps you may need to do so that if you agree, when I finish it, we lose no time getting it posted. It may be to long to e-mail but I think you should review it.
It is longer now and I am calling it done, for now, and posting it behind this one. Links to it could make a letter/petition considerably shorter and much more manageable. Merely E-mailing the link to Gun Owners or Posting it on other forums could have a profound effect. Do with it whatever you deem best.
This is a plea for unity, plain and simple. If you own any type of firearm, from a BB gun to a .50 BMG, a howitzer, tank, Civil War Cannon. whatever, for whatever reason or purpose, I appeal to your intellect, curiosity and common sense, to read this. What do you have to lose???
It is becoming clear, finally, to a lot of American citizens that our Constitution and The Bill Of Rights are under attack. Modern Lawmakers are doing whatever possible to restrict our rights by passing legislation that does not reflect the will of the people. Examples: McCain-Feingold, (Became Public Law No: 107-155 on 3/27/2002), The "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE" (Another affront to our 1st Amendment Rights): http://www.aim.org/aim_report_cliffs_notes/5229_0_4_0/ . Our Esteemed Legislators no longer seem to serve "The People" and instead, seem to be promoting a much more sinister agenda of "Globalization" and A Total Scuttling of our National Sovereignty. (ie: Open Borders, The NAU, and This Immigration Reform Act.) The present Immigration Debate is 100% Political "Smoke and Mirrors" in support of a political agenda. BUT, that's another story.
Now you may ask, where am I going with this??
Although the first unconstitutional violation of The Constitution was exercised by President Lincoln, since then the assault has not ceased but rather become the norm. Law after law (even some that were not ratified) have been enacted into Law in direct opposition to the Constitution AND The Bill Of Rights. An easy target of these Unconstitutional Laws seems to be the 2nd Amendment. So far, there have been OVER 20,000 such Unconstitutional Gun Laws put on the books PAVING THE WAY for these other violations of the Constitution and Bill Of Rights. It is only getting worse as time passes and every success emboldens these LAW-makers to take these restrictions a step further. Incrementally, they are STEALING our Heritage and stripping us of our Rights!!!
The American People gave them an inch; they've taken a mile. And they, STILL, are not satisfied. What is even worse, in all this madness, they, these constant violators of our rights, seem to have a willing ally.
Now, this may be hard for some to digest and harder still for others to accept. It is, however, documented FACT. But first, let me remind you hunters and target shooters that your sporting activities ARE NOT offered up ANY kind of Guarantees in the founding documents. Some STATES have passed that legislation, but of what value is that if the FEDERAL Government bans ALL firearms and makes access to ammunition almost imposable? There is a move afoot to do just that as a means to get around the 2nd Amendment. If the 2nd Amendment Dies, so to goes your privileges to hunt when they take YOUR guns also!!! And if you still think your "Hunting" or "Target Shooting" firearms are safe, then you, plain and simply put, are NOT familiar with the current pending legislationS.
My intent here is not as an NRA basher. Only to expose some of the current MYTHS surrounding their activities on our behalf, as firearms owners. As a Token Example Of NRA support for Your 2nd Amendment Rights:
Let us first consider the "Uniform Machinegun Act" which provided for the registration of machine guns and was adopted in a few states Conn., Va., Md., Ark., and Montana and quite possibly others. This Legislation was developed with the support of the NRA, BEFORE the feds ultimately adopted the "National Firearms Act" in 1934. The reason this stands out, is that MANY people believe that the "National Firearms Act of 1934" was THE pivotal law, the first of the Unconstitutional Laws. Thereby clearing an ever-widening path, allowing for further infringements.
"The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate
and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol, revolver ammunition.
The NRA supported legislation to amend the "Federal Firearms Act" in regard to handguns when it was introduced in August, 1963.
In 1965, the NRA continued its support of an expansion of the above legislation to include rifles and shotguns, as well as handguns.
Where was the NRA when the most sweeping gun control bill in history, The 1968 Gun Control Act, was passed? Granted, with that success, the brazen assaults have been stepped up and become ever more inclusive, incrementally!!! When a Ruger 1022 makes the list of firearms they want banned, it SHOULD TELL YOU SOMETHING!!! Now we face H.R. 1022, H.R. 297 and if your not up to speed S. 1237 among others!! You need to view these bills!!! (There is NO NRA OPPOSITION.)
Additionally the NRA supported the regulations concerning the movement of handguns in interstate and foreign commerce by:
1. Requiring a sworn statement, containing certain information, from the purchaser to the seller for the receipt of a handgun in interstate commerce;
2. Providing for notification of local police of prospective sales;
3. Requiring an additional 7-day waiting period by the seller after receipt of acknowledgement of notification to local police;
4. Prescribing a minimum age of 21 for obtaining a license to sell firearms and increasing the license fees;
5. Providing for written notification by manufacturer or dealer to carrier that a firearm is being shipped in interstate commerce, and;
6. Increasing penalties for violation.
NRA HELPED WRITE the 1986 federal law prohibiting the manufacture and importation of "armor piercing ammunition" adopted standards.
The NRA has been hard at work, over the last few years, turning a RIGHT (guaranteed by our constitution) into a revocable PRIVILEGE. Many pro-gun people commend them for this. Others see it for what it really is. INFRINGMENT!!
"Project EXILE" IS the NRA's very own pet project.
NRA'S project (EXILE) supports ALL Unconstitutional gun laws. Handgun Control Inc. supports it TOO. NRA-ILA Executive Director James Jay Baker commented, "I'm glad that the president has finally agreed with the NRA that enforcing federal firearms laws makes sense. We've been pushing for more enforcement of existing laws. Their version of enforcement equals expanding the current infringement and creating additional new ones.
How many of these QUOTES support the 2nd Amendment OR Your Understanding of said Amendment????
1). It was NRA PRESIDENT Dr. C.R. (Pink) Gutermuth, who saw "no problem with gun registration," and was head of the Wildlife Management Institute, who became NRA President in 1973.
Part of the problem began during the unlamented regime of former Executive Vice President Warren Cassidy. NRA lobbyists under Cassidy stopped opposing gun control bills and started offering NRA-approved versions of the same legislation. They started WRITING ANTI-GUN LEGISLATION.
Politicians were lobbying their colleagues for the so-called "instant check?" These pro-gunners were pushing a gun control bill that the NRA was strongly supporting.
2). Jim Baker of the NRA was quoted by USA Today on October 26, 1993 as saying: "We already support 65% of the Brady bill, because it moves to an instant check, which is WHAT WE WANT."
3). NRA spokesman Bill McIntrye said that the instant background check also in the bill "will be a victory for gun owners".
4). From NRA Board member Tanya Metaksa: I think this agreement was a victory for those who see flaws in the current bill. This is a much different Brady bill. This bill sunsets into what we've been supporting for several years [the instant check]. If you look at it in the long range, IT`S OUR BILL in five years.
5). Denver NRA Members Meeting May 1, 1999. Then NRA Executive Vice President Wayne R. LaPierre, Jr., said: "First, we believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America's schools, period ... with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel." All across the country, school boards and state legislators started doing precisely what LaPierre suggested: shutting down school riflery programs, prohibiting historical firearms displays, forbidding hunter safety training with unloaded guns, and banning gun possession by teachers and other adults with carry licenses. A good example of the long range implications of what LaPierre endorsed back then, is the recent tragedy at Virginia Tech. Making schools a "gun free zone" where lunatics can murder with impunity, was his response to the Columbine shootings!! What happened to advocating responsible carry, by responsible citizens???
6). LaPierre also blessed gun show background checks by saying: "We will consider instant checks at gun shows when, and only when, this Administration stops (charging for NICS checks) and stops illegally compiling the records of millions of lawful gun buyers." In other words it IS OK as long as we don't have to pay you to violate our Rights!!!!
7). The next day President Charlton Heston flatly said on ABC "This Week" that he was "in favor of" gun show background checks. Within weeks, bills for gun show background checks - and "youth gun access" bans - had been submitted in both houses of Congress!
8). NRA Board of Directors member Larry Craig, was one of the co-sponsors of this bill, "Our Lady of Peace Act" ( http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h107-4757 ), which was introduced by Caroline McCarthy, and supported by Chuck Schumer along with the usual band of anti Second Amendment slime like, Ted Kennedy, Blanche Lincoln and Richard Durbin.
9). Most recently the NRA tried to derail a case in Washington DC. A case that ultimately overturned a gun ban. Why? Because they said it was "too good" and might actually make it before the supreme court. A supreme court (considering the make up of it now) where we have the best chance of them handing down a favorable ruling, than we have had in decades. With the very real potential, of the democrats gaining control in the next election (thereby giving them the opportunity to choose the next judges) if not now, WHEN? The decision has been appealed!!!
10). We can't forget the "help" we got from the NRA. In the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act." Not debating, if setting this kind of precedent with legislation, protecting industries, is right. Not debating whether the industry needed this protection. The point here is, that there was a CLEAN bill (800) on the floor, AT THE SAME TIME. Everyone agrees that either bill (397 or 800) would pass through the senate, with no problem. So it depended on the house. There are always more votes than there are co-sponsors of a bill. S. Bill 800 had over 250 signed on as co-sponsors. MORE than enough to pass it, CLEAN. Why did the NRA CHOOSE to back the anti-gun laden bill, when there was a CLEAN alternative? For a true PRO-gun advocate, this was a no brainer. We are still waiting to see, if the anti-gun attachments that were on the one that was passed, is going to come back and bite us in the backside.
11). What, in the NRA's Mindless agenda, constitutes Pro-Gun Legislation????
From their own newsletter:
NRA-ILA Grassroots Alert Vol. 14, No. 21: http://www.nraila.org/GrassrootsAlerts/Read.aspx?ID=394
MAKE YOURSELF HEARD AT TOWN HALL MEETINGS! Congress will be on its Memorial Day District Work Period next week. During this time, your Senators and Representative will be back home in their states and districts.
Many lawmakers use this time to hold town hall meetings, and take questions from their constituents. These meetings offer a tremendous opportunity for you to personally voice your strong support for a number of pro-gun bills pending in Congress.
Is this the "Representation" YOU want/expect in support of YOUR RIGHTS??? If so, that is sad, but it's one that I'm not happy with at all.
First Amendment Rights?
Was it the National Rifle Association that had ONE OF IT'S OWN MEMBERS, a pro-gun activist, ARRESTED at its national convention on, April 27, 2003 in Orlando, Florida for handing out pro-gun freedom literature from an organization known as the Free State Project, Inc. The unlucky NRA member was Timothy Condon, a Marine Corps Vietnam COMBAT Veteran and Director of Member Services for the rapidly growing Free State Project.
Recently the NRA tried to derail a case in Washington DC. The case that ultimately overturned a gun ban. Why? Because they said it was "too good" and might actually make it before the supreme court. A supreme court (considering the make up of it now) where we have the best chance of them handing down a favorable ruling, than we have had in decades. With the very real potential, of the democrats gaining control in the next election (thereby giving them the opportunity to choose the next judges) if not now, WHEN?
UPDATE: On Tuesday, 8 May, 2007, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. circuit, declined to review the decision in Parker v. District of Columbia--the case in March that upheld the Second Amendment as an individual right and struck down Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban. The decision not to review the case means that an earlier ruling by the three-judge panel will stand. SO, THE NRA WAS SUCCESSFUL in their derailment process and it will never be heard by the Supreme Court!!!!!
The Anti's Don't want this decision reviewed by the Supreme Court either: WHY?
D.C. Debates Bringing Gun-Ban Ruling Appeal to Supreme Court -
http://www.constitutioncenter.org/education/TeachingwithCurrentEvents/ConstitutionNewswire/17638.shtml
NOT CONVINCED YET??
Admittedly, some of the following information is "historical" in nature. The present administration had nothing to do with it. On the same note, some of this information is CURRENT. It shows a distinct pattern. An agenda? There are more bills that the NRA HELPED WRITE, or WROTE themselves. Other, ANTI-GUN candidates, that they endorsed. But, if this doesn't open your eyes, nothing will.
While reading the following, keep in mind that former NRA board member Russ Howard, RESIGNED from the board. His words; "In the past 5 years I've become increasingly concerned over NRA's penchant for giving UNDESERVED grades to politicians who TRAMPLE on the 2nd Amendment."
In California JOAN MILKE FLORES vs. JANE HARMAN. 36TH CONGRESSIONAL
Flores is an anti-gun Republican who voted FOR the Los Angeles Assault Rifle Ban. Harman is an anti- gun Democrat who got an "A" rating from the NRA. Why an "A" rating? She was ANTI-GUN!!! Who later said that she supports the assault weapon ban.
CHRISTINE REED vs. TERRY FREIDMAN (State Assembly)
Reed was an anti-gun C-rated Republican Handgun Control Inc. member who had been mayor of Santa Monica. Reed who should have been an "F". Freidman was an F-rated incumbent Democrat who authored many anti-gun bills
TRICIA HUNTER: Hunter was state senator whose bid to retain office was based on high-profile attacks on "killer assault rifles". She was rated "A-" by the NRA.
Howard Dean got an A+ from the NRA while governor, he supported the assault weapons ban and Brady bill.
Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA). Did not vote when needed, but was helped by the NRA come re-election.
Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA) voted FOR the Brady Bill (3 times) then was helped by the NRA come re-election.
Congressman Elton Gallegly -- voted FOR the Brady bill and the assault weapon ban and got an A-, and an endorsement. NRA's Terry O'Grady said, 'Gallegly voted against us on Brady and the Crime Bill, but he's always been with us before. We've decided to forgive him, give him an A- and endorse him. SAY WHAT?
In Virginia, 15 legislators were given A ratings after they voted FOR both the one-gun-a-month ban AND the shotgun ban. 41 legislators who voted for either or both bans got A ratings. 7 got exceptional, "above the call of duty" ratings.
In North Carolina, some districts have two senators. In the '94 elections, District 20 was represented by Ted Kaplan and Marvin Ward. Both favored assault weapon bans, handgun registration, and a one-gun-a-month ban. Their challengers were solid pro-gunners Ham Horton and Mark McDaniels (who fought tooth and nail for CCW). Nevertheless, ILA upgraded both anti-gun incumbents to "A" (one was initially a C), endorsed them, and supported them by mailing orange alert cards to NRA members in their district. Kaplan and Ward lost anyway, as incensed local groups like Grass Roots NC broke ranks with ILA and helped elect the pro-gun challengers.
In NC in 1995, Senator Fountain Odom betrayed the 2nd Amendment by gutting the CCW bill in his subcommittee. The bill had come over in more or less tolerable format from the house. Odom fixed it so that only a few police instructors could give the mandatory training. NRA instructors were prohibited. He also worked to move un-permitted CCW from a misdemeanor to a felony, prohibit CCW with any alcohol "remaining" in the body, prohibit CCW in financial institutions, mandate that all training be fully repeated for each renewal, and gut statewide preemption. Limited preemption was restored in the full judiciary committee, but Odom betrayed us again, fixing it so CCW could be prohibited in any "park". Later on the floor, to give ILA cover, Odom amended the training section to allow NRA instructors to do the training. In 1996, Tanya Metaksa gave Odom an A, an endorsement, and an orange ALERT postcard mailing telling NRA members, "Senator Odom has demonstrated his commitment to our right to self-defense...Here's how you can help re-elect Fountain Odom -- a dedicated supporter of your Second Amendment rights. Help the campaign...make a contribution...spread the word to family, friends, and fellow gun owners... Sincerely, Tanya K. Metaksa." Odom's still trampling on our rights. Now he's pushing for a CCW liability law.
In Virginia in 1996, extreme "F" rated gun grabber Congressman Jim Moran faced "A" rated, NRA life member John Otey. The American Rifleman carried the following message: "THIS IS YOUR OFFICIAL PRO-GUN BALLOT FOR THE FOLLOWING DISTRICT: VIRGINIA 8, US CONGRESS.. .NO ENDORSEMENT"
NO endorsement for an A rated NRA life member challenging an F- rated gun grabber???
In Virginia, 3 congressmen who voted many times against gun rights and supported the Lautenberg ban, kept their A+ ratings (part of a large club of turncoat A and A+ politicians). Tom Davis got an A after voicing support for Brady and the assault weapon ban and orchestrating a unanimous vote of support for the one-gun-a-month ban as a Fairfax County Supervisor.
In Pennsylvania (1993), then Republican Minority Whip Matt Ryan INTRODUCED an assault rifle ban. In 1994, he kept his A+ rating.
Deborah Danuski, a Democrat from Lisbon, was endorsed by the anti-handgun group, while also receiving an "A-" from the NRA on its report card of candidates. As a matter of fact, in Maine, both the NRA and Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence supported 18 of the same candidates!
In Colorado, where the NRA supported Senator Wayne Allard for office, and even boosted his pro-gun lobby contributions to $37,000 since 1990, Allard stated flatly that he would support federal legislation requiring gun registration for private gun sales at gun shows. Is a legislator who wants to expand gun registration someone who stands up for the rights of gun owners?
From Virginia, where the NRA Political Victory Fund touted the pro-gun "accomplishments" of Delegate Jack Rollison. This is the same Rollison who in a press release had the unmitigated gall to paint Gun Owners of America and the Virginia Citizens Defense League, who have endorsed his opponent Jeff Frederick, as extremists and "milita-esque" organizations. This is the same Jack Rollison who wants to ban your right to self-defense in any restaurant that happens to sell liquor. And this is the same Jack Rollison who voted correctly on only two out of eight issues important to Virginia gun owners.
In 2006, the NRA rated Ron Paul (without argument, the MOST constitutional representative we have in office) with a "B" because he did not follow along in lock step, when the NRA endorsed (what Ron Paul saw) as an UNconstitutional bill. One that the NRA supported. Instead, they endorsed his UNproved, UNtested, DEMOCRATIC opponent.
Defenders Of Freedom???
John Dingell? The NRA's Golden Boy? The former NRA Director? The same guy who voted in favor of the 1994 "Assault" weapons ban and then resigned from the Board of Directors the day after the vote? The same Dingell who received the NRA's Harlon B. Carter Award, despite voting FOR an outright gun BAN? The same Dingell that coined the term"jack-booted thugs" when referring to the BATF? THAT Dingell?
The NRA awarded Assemblyman Rod Wright its "Defender of Freedom Award". This is the same Rod Wright who supported UNconstitutional limits on firearms purchases and background checks. This is the same Rod Wright who authored a bill to increase licensing fees from $3 to up to $100. Never mind the absurdity of bilking peaceable citizens of hundreds of dollars for making a constitutionally protected purchase. This champion of "freedom" apparently thinks it's perfectly acceptable to license and charge Americans for exercising their rights. The NRA's "Defender of Freedom" in 2001 voted against gun owners 62 percent of the time
The NRA also gave their "Defender of Freedom Award" to one Kevin Mannix, who ran for governor here in 2002. In 1999 Mannix was the architect of the worst piece of gun control legislation in 10 years, in the Oregon House.
If an organization claims to SPEAK FOR ME, then I WANT TO KNOW what they are doing/saying. If they make the claim that they champion MY RIGHTS, then I want them to DO IT, NOT compromise MY RIGHTS away.
Is the NRA supposed to be placed on a pedestal? Given FREE REIGN, where NO ONE is supposed to question their actions? Are they NOT to be held accountable for their actions? This organization, historically, advocates gun control laws that are Unconstitutional. Simply take a look at past and current gun laws. The NRA has played a large part in getting "MANY" of them passed. What part of, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED or "The Right To Keep And BEAR Arms", is hard to understand??? I am NOT saying that the NRA is TOTALLY ineffectual, only that they are apparently on the "Wrong side of the fence" where the 2nd Amendment is concerned. If you would like to investigate the NRA they are good at blowing their own horn. But, It does takes reading between the lines and further information sometimes to see the REAL agenda. Sometimes as noted above it doesn't!! Since when does it take a brain surgeon to know the only PRO-2nd Amendment legislation, H.R. 1092, Introduced (By Rep. Ronald Paul [R-TX]), is lying in committee, awaiting the same demise as it's predecessor, H. R. 1703, No sponsors, never brought up for debate, just left to die in committee. NO SUPPORT, or even a mention of its existence, FROM THE NRA!!!! How many gun laws has the NRA ever tried to have repealed? In how many states have they fought for a "Vermont Style" CCW law, rather than a compromise infringement of the 2nd Amendment?
NRA Background and Web-sites:
National Rifle Association - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Offers a Pro-Con Historical Reference
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rifle_Association
National Rifle Association - NRA Website Gateway
http://www.nra.org/
Official National Rifle Association of America Home Page
http://www.nra.org/home.aspx
NRA-ILA: Homepage
(The Legislative Center Alert IS A Good Site to Check Regularly.)
http://www.nraila.org/
NRA-ILA: Second Amendment Center
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/SecondAmendment.aspx
Victory???
Yes. Occasionally. Some point to "Katrina", the most recent. However, I don't see the Katrina "Victory" doing Illinois gun owners any good. Do You?? A hollow victory at best, most will never see their firearms (or compensation) again!!! It was more of a PR victory for the NRA than anything else!!!
New, ever expanding, wider sweeping, "Laws" have precedence over that short-lived victory. Again, passed with NRA support!! (Directly or indirectly.) Condoning an action, by inaction, is the same as supporting that action!!! Unfortunately the NRA doesn't understand that either.
Did the NRA oppose SB16, the Daley "Assault Weapons" ban. A Carbon copy of H.R.1022??? What will it take to get the NRA to oppose H.R.1022 (or 297 for that fact) or will this sweeping "Assault Weapons Ban" fly under the radar as well.. And then the Gestapo comes knocking NATION-WIDE????
I am sure there are many that consider this an innocent bill, because it's only target is assault weapons and high cap. mags.!!! Ignorance or indifference (doesn't affect me) of the content will come as a surprise to those choosing to remain that way. (As it has in Illinois.) Then one day, in the very near future, they will be confused when the authorities show up to take their hunting rifles, handguns, everything!!!!
BOTTOM LINE????
It is time to set aside the divisive wedges driven between the different factions of gun owners. The gun grabbers in congress, with the obvious assistance of the NRA, have successfully divided us into our own "Special Interest Groups" and incrementally passed legislation that some accept and support because "It doesn't Affect me". For that very reason, deceptive labeling successfully deflects a lot of objections. Throw "Assault Weapons" and or "Large Capacity Magazines" into the title line and you've deflected 50% of the POSSIBLE opposers/objectioners from even looking at the content!!! The even greater danger is that it all goes unchallenged and, written into these unconstitutional laws, are infringements on other Amendments. Upon other Rights, guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Amendments that, otherwise, would be off limits and if attacked directly would create a public outcry.
Ignorance, indifference, self-gratification and the ME first mentality WILL be the Demise of Gun Ownership AND Freedom in this once great and proud nation!!
Other advocates of the 2nd Amendment, though they lack the membership numbers and clout of the NRA, have a better track record. Some have even been Labeled "RADICAL" by the MSM simply because they DO SUPPORT AND DEFEND the 2nd Amendment!!! I don't feel it necessary to tell you to whom I refer. The real intent is to unify ALL Gun Owners under one flag and believe it or not, the decision you make will effect the ultimate survival or demise of a once free nation.
ONLY when there is a massive out-cry of "FOUL", by the membership, will you see a change in NRA policy. If not NOW, When??? It's already almost to late!!!
Most of the NRA Historical Facts were Originally Posted - 05/17/2007: Page Two @ 7:21:25 PM http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=245795 where a very lively debate ensued. You may want to check it out.
ALSO SEE: Redress Of Grievances
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=247541
RMGO/GOA/JPFO/NAGR
"Do you believe the NRA would respond to a petition??"
Yes or no will do, here.
"Do you believe the NRA would respond to a petition??"
Yes or no will do, here.
Nice try gunphreak.
quote:A simple question for TR Fox:
"Do you believe the NRA would respond to a petition??"
Yes or no will do, here.
Nice try gunphreak.
[:D][:D][:o)]