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

wsfiredudewsfiredude Member Posts: 7,769 ✭✭✭
Standing Guard: Vote For The Second Amendment






In just a few days, on November 4, gun owners will be presented with a very clear choice of a pro-Second Amendment versus an anti-Second Amendment Presidential ticket. John McCain and Sarah Palin versus Barack Obama and Joe Biden represents a stark contrast for the future of our freedom.

In that choice, one fact is foremost:

The next president, by filling inevitable vacancies on the U.S. Supreme Court, will determine the continued existence of our Right To Keep and Bear Arms.

The landmark Heller decision by the U.S. Supreme Court--which struck down the D.C. gun ban and its attendant criminalizing of armed self-defense in the home--was decided by a one vote margin, in a 5-4 decision. The court's decision was aided by briefs filed by Congress and states--briefs signed by John McCain and by Palin's state of Alaska.

The next president, by filling inevitable vacancies on the U.S. Supreme Court, will determine the continued existence of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Barack Obama and Joe Biden refused to sign in support of the Second Amendment. But for President George W. Bush's two high court nominations, it could easily have gone the other way. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Associate Justice Samuel Alito truly made the difference. Keep in mind that Barack Obama and the man who is now his running mate, U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden, voted against confirming both.

And Biden, one-time chairman of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, was radically opposed and used every trick in the book including the threat of a filibuster to kill the confirmation process.

Gun owners have U.S. Sen. John McCain to thank for quashing Biden's filibuster moves and brokering the Senate agreement that allowed confirmation. If Biden had his way, the Senate could have stalled indefinitely, leaving two vacancies unfilled, and creating a seven-member court dominated by the very justices who opposed the Second Amendment as protection for a broad, individual right.

Biden told the NAACP during his own losing primary bid for the Democratic presidential nomination:

"The next president is likely to name at least one, if not three new Supreme Court justices. We should start this national debate by recognizing the truth--that Roberts and Alito have turned the court upside down . . I guarantee you that will change."

Turning "the court upside down ." As in upholding the Second Amendment.

Biden's pledge came in an important context. With funding from globalist gun-banner George Soros, the NAACP filed the most onerous litigation de-signed by our enemies to drive America's firearm industry into bankruptcy.

That suit, argued before Brooklyn, N.Y., U.S. District Judge Jack B. Weinstein, claimed that virtually all elements of the federally regulated and lawful firearm industry were collectively responsible for the totally unrelated illegal acts of armed, violent criminals. The suit ultimately was a loser, but cost consumers millions of dollars in legal fees. It was one of a string of serial, punitive lawsuits brought before lifetime-appointee Weinstein.

And on that score, the last such lawsuit before Weinstein was thrown out by the U.S. Court of Appeals, which ruled the litigation violated the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, the NRA-backed 2005 law--a law vehemently opposed by Obama and Biden.

If the Obama and Biden team has its way, the nation will again be flooded with hundreds of such suits creating what one gun-ban lawyer called "death by a thousand cuts." Under an Obama-Biden administration, the lower federal courts would resemble cloned versions of Weinstein's Brooklyn star chamber.

During the remarkable Saddleback forum, Obama attacked the nominations of Associate Justice Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, author of the brilliant Heller decision. Counted with his "no" votes against Roberts and Alito, that's an Obama thumbs down for four of the five justices who rendered the Supreme Court's definitive decision upholding the Second Amendment as protecting an individual right and recognizing the right to armed self-defense in the home.

In this last column before we go to the polls I must make an additional point. While we have disagreed in the past with Sen. McCain on a few specific issues, these disagreements pale in comparison to what the future would be like for gun owners if an Obama-Biden regime were to control all organs of federal power and land a one-two punch against freedom.

John McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, is an NRA Life member, life-long gun owner, hunter and staunch Second Amendment supporter. She is an electrifying force for preservation and expansion of all the gains we have made in the past decades.

I found it remarkable that in every story announcing her selection she was described as a "lifetime" member of the NRA. She is indeed proud of her Life membership. Suddenly the phony poses of Obama and Biden wrapping themselves around the Second Amendment are stripped to their essence--a semantic trick designed to fool gun owners. You can't let that happen.

Your vote is a remarkable power that you must wield to preserve the Second Amendment. With all of this, there is a simple message. Vote. Get your friends, family and co-workers to vote. And vote for the only ticket that will uphold our Freedom. Vote for the Second Amendment. Vote for the McCain-Palin ticket!

Comments

  • wsfiredudewsfiredude Member Posts: 7,769 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Im reading some posts and seeing that some are not happy with the NRA. Can someone summarize or show me a previous post that explains some of this.

    Thanks
  • wsfiredudewsfiredude Member Posts: 7,769 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    i see on hear a lot of you down talking the nra. weather through ignorance or anything else i am unaware of why this would be so. what do they do that is so bad? and also i live connecticut. manye of the ranges here require a nra membership to join. so unless yuour a member you need to have or have a good buddy who has enough land for a 100yrd range to shoot that is outside city limits. which here in ct isnt the easiest thing to accomplish. there are indoor 25 yrd ranges that will let anyone in but what good is that for honing your skills with a rifle? if not jopining the nra what other groups are there that would be helpful in this?
  • wsfiredudewsfiredude Member Posts: 7,769 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    National Rifle Association of America
    Attn: Wayne LaPierre - Exec. VP
    11250 Waples Mill Rd.
    Fairfax VA 22030

    I have been a member of the NRA since 1991, and a life member since 1998. I have supported the NRA both vocally and monetarily in their efforts, but no more. I have stood idly by for the last few years and watched as more and more restrictions have been signed into law. Meanwhile, the NRA has appeared to do little or nothing to fight these restrictions, and even went as far as supporting the most recent legislation, HR 2640.
    It was this support of HR 2640 that was the proverbial "nail in the coffin." I know that any legislation with support from the likes of Sen. Schumer and Rep. McCarthy cannot be good for firearms owners. It doesn't surprise me when they support restrictive legislation, but for the organization, that supposedly represents me and my RTKBA supports it, I find it appalling. HR 2640 was nothing more than the typical "knee-jerk" reaction to a terrible tragedy; ironically, an incident that may have been prevented had it not been for previous legislation declaring school property and college campuses as "gun-free" zones. Do not bother with replying to me singing the praises of this legislation, and touting it as being pro-gun. It's not. When I was a kid, my grandfather used to tell me, "Shane, you can take a hog. You can clean and wash him up. You can put a ribbon around his neck; but you know what? He's still a hog." The NRA fell for this garbage hook, line, and sinker. They bought-in to the argument that HR 2640 was "common-sense" regulation. The NRA believed the government of the United States, and what they were saying. A little study in history will show that is a very risky thing to do. The NRA should also cease its mantra of "enforce, enforce, enforce the existing laws." _ of the existing firearms laws now are unconstitutional. How about "repeal, repeal, repeal?"

    I also take issue with the NRA on its action, or lack thereof, in this election year. We have a candidate vying for the Presidency this year that has openly stated his support for the Constitution / RTKBA, and has backed it up with his action in the U.S. House of Representatives. His record leaves no question as to his passionate support of the 2nd Amendment. He has consistently voted for pro-gun legislation and has consistently voted against further restrictions on our RTKBA. I would think that an organization as influential as the NRA would be exhausting all efforts in encouraging support for Rep. Ron Paul. In your literature, you are always using the example of "Lexington Green" and the "shot heard round the world." Well, it is time you take some of you own medicine and follow the example of the famous patriot Paul Revere. You should be "hanging lanterns in the bell tower" and "riding through the night" to inform gun owners about Rep. Paul, and doing everything you can to garner support for him in his bid for the Presidency, but I have witnessed none of this. No email alerts. No mailers. No columns in the American Rifleman. No phone calls. Nothing but the chirping of crickets. Why? I surmise that you have taken the same position as the mainstream media, and believe Rep. Paul is a non-viable candidate, i.e. unelectable. You will choose your "golden-boy" candidate to endorse, even though that candidate will not be as strong a supporter of the Constitution as Rep. Paul. We have started choosing candidates on "electability" or "the lesser of two evils." I have always despised that logic because your conscience should determine whom you support, and voting for "the lesser of two evils" is still a vote for evil. Whatever happened to doing the right thing because it is right? It may not be popular, but it is right, nonetheless.

    Because of the two issues I have mentioned, with particular emphasis on the first one, you, the NRA, have alienated gun owners. Many of them are members of your organization. Many of them are former members of your organization. I have been a "hold-out" so far. I believe everyone is subject to making bad decisions, and I believe in giving them a chance to redeem themselves. Many of your former members will disagree, and believe you have established a pattern of the aforementioned behaviors. I am inclined to agree with them. I believe you may be able to save face if:

    1) You issue a formal apology to all firearms owners for supporting this most recent legislation (HR2640), as well as the other "common-sense" restrictions you've stood behind.

    2) Immediately begin a campaign to not only block further restrictive legislation, but to repeal most of the legislation in place. You should be familiar with it, because you gave your stamp of approval on much of it.

    3) Endorse Rep. Ron Paul as your candidate for President of the United States. You know of all the candidates, he is the strongest supporter of the RTKBA, and has the record to prove it.

    Do this, and it will show the gun owners in this country that you have some integrity left. However, continue on the path you have been on, and you will leave me with no choice. I will be mailing my membership card back to you, and withdrawing from your organization. I will not give my vocal support to you when I am among other gun owners, and will point them to organizations such as GOA and JFPO. I will give you no monetary support to put in the bag with your "thirty pieces of silver" either. And do not make the mistake of thinking, "He's just one member; it doesn't matter." There are many other of your members that feel just as betrayed as I do. Many have left, and unless there is a change of direction, many more will leave, including myself. Do what is right.
    Sincerely, Shane Draughn


    Scathing, but I had to send it to them. They brought it upon themselves.
  • 45long45long Member Posts: 642 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Firedude,,,,,,,I can agree with you more. Though I am not a Paul supporter. I know exactly what your talking about with the NRA. I was a member a fews back. California was heading down another road to ban something and I called the NRA to see what they were doing to help stop yet another ban in this state. Basically I was told that California was a lost cause and that they were concetrating on a national level. So I said ok and asked to be transferred to the membership dept. so I could cancel mine. That was when Heston was either just out or on his way. I don;t recall exactly. But it was very disappointing. I ahve recently tried to get educational materials from them concerning their children safty programs. E-mail phone calls, nothing. Not interested anymore in those little things. All NRA Members have been sold down the river by these guys. It's a disgrace. Shamefull.
  • kyplumberkyplumber Member Posts: 11,111
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by wsfiredude
    National Rifle Association of America
    Attn: Wayne LaPierre - Exec. VP
    11250 Waples Mill Rd.
    Fairfax VA 22030

    I have been a member of the NRA since 1991, and a life member since 1998. I have supported the NRA both vocally and monetarily in their efforts, but no more. I have stood idly by for the last few years and watched as more and more restrictions have been signed into law. Meanwhile, the NRA has appeared to do little or nothing to fight these restrictions, and even went as far as supporting the most recent legislation, HR 2640.
    It was this support of HR 2640 that was the proverbial "nail in the coffin." I know that any legislation with support from the likes of Sen. Schumer and Rep. McCarthy cannot be good for firearms owners. It doesn't surprise me when they support restrictive legislation, but for the organization, that supposedly represents me and my RTKBA supports it, I find it appalling. HR 2640 was nothing more than the typical "knee-jerk" reaction to a terrible tragedy; ironically, an incident that may have been prevented had it not been for previous legislation declaring school property and college campuses as "gun-free" zones. Do not bother with replying to me singing the praises of this legislation, and touting it as being pro-gun. It's not. When I was a kid, my grandfather used to tell me, "Shane, you can take a hog. You can clean and wash him up. You can put a ribbon around his neck; but you know what? He's still a hog." The NRA fell for this garbage hook, line, and sinker. They bought-in to the argument that HR 2640 was "common-sense" regulation. The NRA believed the government of the United States, and what they were saying. A little study in history will show that is a very risky thing to do. The NRA should also cease its mantra of "enforce, enforce, enforce the existing laws." _ of the existing firearms laws now are unconstitutional. How about "repeal, repeal, repeal?"

    I also take issue with the NRA on its action, or lack thereof, in this election year. We have a candidate vying for the Presidency this year that has openly stated his support for the Constitution / RTKBA, and has backed it up with his action in the U.S. House of Representatives. His record leaves no question as to his passionate support of the 2nd Amendment. He has consistently voted for pro-gun legislation and has consistently voted against further restrictions on our RTKBA. I would think that an organization as influential as the NRA would be exhausting all efforts in encouraging support for Rep. Ron Paul. In your literature, you are always using the example of "Lexington Green" and the "shot heard round the world." Well, it is time you take some of you own medicine and follow the example of the famous patriot Paul Revere. You should be "hanging lanterns in the bell tower" and "riding through the night" to inform gun owners about Rep. Paul, and doing everything you can to garner support for him in his bid for the Presidency, but I have witnessed none of this. No email alerts. No mailers. No columns in the American Rifleman. No phone calls. Nothing but the chirping of crickets. Why? I surmise that you have taken the same position as the mainstream media, and believe Rep. Paul is a non-viable candidate, i.e. unelectable. You will choose your "golden-boy" candidate to endorse, even though that candidate will not be as strong a supporter of the Constitution as Rep. Paul. We have started choosing candidates on "electability" or "the lesser of two evils." I have always despised that logic because your conscience should determine whom you support, and voting for "the lesser of two evils" is still a vote for evil. Whatever happened to doing the right thing because it is right? It may not be popular, but it is right, nonetheless.

    Because of the two issues I have mentioned, with particular emphasis on the first one, you, the NRA, have alienated gun owners. Many of them are members of your organization. Many of them are former members of your organization. I have been a "hold-out" so far. I believe everyone is subject to making bad decisions, and I believe in giving them a chance to redeem themselves. Many of your former members will disagree, and believe you have established a pattern of the aforementioned behaviors. I am inclined to agree with them. I believe you may be able to save face if:

    1) You issue a formal apology to all firearms owners for supporting this most recent legislation (HR2640), as well as the other "common-sense" restrictions you've stood behind.

    2) Immediately begin a campaign to not only block further restrictive legislation, but to repeal most of the legislation in place. You should be familiar with it, because you gave your stamp of approval on much of it.

    3) Endorse Rep. Ron Paul as your candidate for President of the United States. You know of all the candidates, he is the strongest supporter of the RTKBA, and has the record to prove it.

    Do this, and it will show the gun owners in this country that you have some integrity left. However, continue on the path you have been on, and you will leave me with no choice. I will be mailing my membership card back to you, and withdrawing from your organization. I will not give my vocal support to you when I am among other gun owners, and will point them to organizations such as GOA and JFPO. I will give you no monetary support to put in the bag with your "thirty pieces of silver" either. And do not make the mistake of thinking, "He's just one member; it doesn't matter." There are many other of your members that feel just as betrayed as I do. Many have left, and unless there is a change of direction, many more will leave, including myself. Do what is right.
    Sincerely, Shane Draughn


    Scathing, but I had to send it to them. They brought it upon themselves.




    Dear Sir,

    Your letter brought a tear to my eye.
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    wsfiredude,

    My hat is off to you sir.

    Excellent letter, excellent points. You are a good man Shane.[^]
  • nyforesternyforester Member Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    wsfiredude

    Do you mind if I copy your letter and send it to the NRA myself ?

    Great job !
    Abort Cuomo
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    WTG!!! A man that can think for himself...glad to see someone else finally figure it out for themselves.
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    Firedude;
    May I post it...without editorial comment...over on General ?

    It may well be poofed...And I prefer I get poofed..

    Well said, by the way.
  • wsfiredudewsfiredude Member Posts: 7,769 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Highball, go ahead and post it. For any other member than may want to copy it and send it to the NRA or post it to another forum, go ahead. The way I see it, it just helps to get the word out. For too long now, people, good people, have been "brainwashed" somehow into believing that:
    1) If the NRA supports it, then it must be good for RTKBA.
    2) The candidate that the NRA endorses is the best with regard to
    RTKBA.
    3) We have to "compromise" and give a little to protect our RTKBA.

    These three statements are all false. I want people to think when it is time to cast their vote. I know i have, and it is blatantly obvious that Rep. Paul is the strongest supporter of the Constitution.
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    Thank you, Sir;

    We who refuse to swallow amy more of what the NRA crams down our throats are hated, reviled, and feared by many rank and file gun owners.
    Indeed...some of us have come to the conclusion that gun owners supporting gun laws may well be the worst kind of enemy..one that seems to be in your camp..so to speak...only to throw a grenade into the ammo dump as soon as ones' back is turned.
  • wsfiredudewsfiredude Member Posts: 7,769 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Highball, you are exactly right. Supporting an organization that supports this type of legislation is well, for lack of a better cliche, shooting yourself in the foot. I have reached a point where I cannot in good conscience support an organization that takes action resulting in the degradation of the Constitution.
  • slumlord44slumlord44 Member Posts: 3,702 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    While I have to agree that the NRA is not always 100% on the right track, if they cease to exist, who will fight for us? If enough people who do not like the direction of the NRA join it and push for change, it will happen. Not supporting it is not an option in my opinion. Ditto for the state rifle associations. If every gun owner in the country did this, the polliticans would not mess with gun owners. United we stand. Divided we fall. If there is a better, viable orginization out there, let us all know. Slumlord44
  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,844 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    For those who have not had a chance to read it.
    A little about the NRA.

    http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=263795

    Read at least the first page.
  • wsfiredudewsfiredude Member Posts: 7,769 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Slum,

    Two organizations that come to mind are GOA (Gun Owners of America) and JPFO (Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership). Both organizations totally and unequivocally support the Constitution / RTKBA as it is written by the Founders, not how some politician or the NRA believes it should be. These organizations are not as large as the NRA and have nowhere near the funding, yet they are 100 times more active in opposing new legislation and fighting for the removal of old legislation. GOA and JPFO have not crawled into bed with anti-RTKBA gurus as the NRA has, and neither organization has ever propagated the failed logic of, "we have to compromise a little."
  • Wagon WheelWagon Wheel Member Posts: 633 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    wsfiredude:

    My complements on an excellent letter. A million of those might have some effect.

    This one may be of value as well. Most of the information on the NRA sell-out is in one post on page 2. Posted - 06/04/2007 : 10:57:02 AM
    Potential NRA petition.
    http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=247347
Sign In or Register to comment.